ML20199K846
| ML20199K846 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 07/03/1986 |
| From: | Bisbee G NEW HAMPSHIRE, STATE OF |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20199K817 | List: |
| References | |
| OL, NUDOCS 8607090263 | |
| Download: ML20199K846 (163) | |
Text
.,. n~6 July 3,=1986 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the SN ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD '*
Al ~7 P2:15 In the matter ot:
)
hh] [0 Sg BREhCk y
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF
)
Docket Nos.:
50-443 NEW HAMPSHIRE
)
and 50-444 (Seabrook Station, Units 1 and 2
)
)
(Off-Site Emergency Planning Issues)
RESPONSE OF THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE TO MOTIONS TO CONTINUE THE AUGUST HEARINGS FILED BY THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY, THE SEACOAST ANTI-POLLUTION LEAGUE AND THE TOWN OF HAMPTON Motions to continue the scheduled August hearing on contentions relating to the New Hampanire Radiological Emergency Response Plan (NHRERP or State Plan) have recently been filed by the Town of Hampton (on June 20, 1986), the Seacoast Anti-Pollution League (on June 27, 1986) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (on June 30, 1986).
To the request of each of these parties that the Board continue the August hearings, the State of New Hampanire nas no objection.
Although the State does not agree with the characterization of the NHRERP as being "substantially incomplete" (see Town of Hampton's June 20, 1986 motion at 3-4), the State is continuing the process of incorporating additional modifications to the State Plan in response to the RAC review, and comments provided 8607090263 860703 PDR ADOCK 05000443 0
ppg
.-6
, by other interested parties.
As explained in the State's July 3, 1986 Report on the Status of the New Hampshire Radiological Emergency Response Plan, the New Hampshire Civil Defense Agency intends to complete these modifications in Revision 2 of the NHRERP by -August -25, -19 86.--
In the interest of allowing all of the parties to this proceeding a reasonable period of time to review Revision 2 of the State Plan and prepare for the hearing on the pending contentions, the State concurs in the requests to continue the August hearing.
The State also agrees that the hearing date should be re-established for October 20, 1986, as requested by FEMA in its June 30, 1986 motion.
Respectfully submitted, THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE STEPHEN E. MERRILL ATTORNEY GENERAL
]
i Dated:
July 3, 1986 By r
/
George Dana Bisben Assistant Attorney General Environmental Protecr. ton Bureau Office of the Attorn*y General 2S Capitol Street Concord, NH 03301-6397
{
Telephone (603) 271-3678 t
I f
1
)
r
.- m.
~
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 5
I, G orge Dana Bisbee, hereby certify that on the day of r, 1986, I made service of the within Repor on the Status of the Newilampshire Radiological Emergency Response Plan, and the Response of the State of New Hampshire to Motions to Continue the August Hearings Filed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Seacoast Anti-Pollution League and the Town of Hampton by mailing copies thereof, postage prepaid, to:
Administrative Judge Helen Hoyt Administrative Judge Sheldon J.
Chairperson Wolfe, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing
?
Board Panel Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory i
Commission Commission Washington, DC 20555 Washington, DC 20555 l
Dr. Emmeth A.
Luebke Dr. Jerry Harbour Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Liceasing Board Panel Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory I
Commission Commission
}
Washington, DC 20555 Washington, DC 20555 Philip Ahrens, Esquire Thomas J. Dignan, Jr.,
Esquire j
Deputy Attorney General R.
K. Gad, III, Esquire l
Department of the Attorney General Ropes & Gray State House Station 6 225 Franklin Street Augusta, ME 04333 Boston, MA 02110 Carol S. Sneider, Esquire Sherwin E.
Turk, Esquire Assistant Attorney General Deputy Assistant Cnief Department of the Attorney General Hearing Counsel One Ashburton Place, 19th Floor Office of the Executive Counsel Boston, MA 02108 Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i
j Ms. Diana P. Randall Washington, DC 20555 70 Collins Stroct Sonorook, NH 03874 Robert A. Backus, Esquife Backus, Meyer & Solomo:
Diane Curran, Esquire 116 Lowell Street Harmon & Weiss P. O.
Box 516 20001 S Street, N.W.
Manchester, NH 03105 Suite 430 Washington, DC 20009 Anne Verge, Chairperson Board or Selectmen l
Jane Doughty Apt. 2056 Old English j
5 Market Street Dover, NH 03820 J
Portsmouth, NH 03801 I
I i
=
)
)
Paul McEachern, Esquire Matthew T.
Brock,' Esquire '
J.
P. Nadeau, Esquire Shaines & McEacne rn Selectmen's Office 25 Maplewood Avenue 10 Central Road P. O. Box 360 Rye, NH 03870 Portsmouth, NH 03801 Mr. Calvin A.
Canney Ms. Roberta.C. Pevear City Manager The Town of Hampton Falls City Hall Drinkwater Road 125 Daniel Street Hampton Falls, NH 03844 Portsmouth, NH 03801 Mrs. Sandra Gavutis Mr. Angie Machiros The Town of Kensington Chairman of the RFD 1, Box 1154 (Route 107)
Board of Selectmen Kensington, NH 03827 Town of Newbury Newbury, MA 01950 Senator Gordon J.
Humphrey Mr. Richard E.
Sullivan U.S. Senate Mayor Washington, DC 20510 City Hall (Attn:
Tom Burack)
Newburyport, MA 01950 Senator Gordon J.
Humphrey William S.
Lord 1 Pillsbury Street Board of Selectmen Concord, NH 03301 Town Hall (Attn:
Herb Boynton)
Friend Street Amesbury, MA 01913 Mr. Thomas Powers Brentwood Board of Selectmen Town Manager RFD Dalton Road Town of Exeter Brentwood, NH 03833 10 Front Street Exeter, NH 03833 Gary W.
Holmes, Esquire Holmes & Ells it. Joseph Flynn 47 Winnacunnet Road Assistant General Counsel Hampton, NH 03841 Office of General Counsel Federal Emergency Management Richard A. Hampe, Esquire Agency Hampe & McNicholac 500 C Street, S.W.
35 Pleasant Street Washington, DC 20472 Concord, NH 03301
- ~
Mr. Ed Thomas Mr. Robert Carr199, Chairman FEMA, Region I Board of Selectmen John W. McCorraack Post Of fice Town Office and Court House Atlantic Avenue Post Office Square North Hampton, NH 03862 Boston, MA 02109 i
k George }ana Bisbe Q k
n
e NEW HMPSHIRE RESPONSES TO RAC REVIEW OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUBMISSION 2 Responses are addressed to items classified as inadequate (1).
In some cases items classified as
- Adequate 7 ( A7) are also addressed. The FEMA-REP = l Element is referenced in the lef t hand margin.
Volume 5 - Letters of Agreement A.3/C.4 The State will review and update letters of agreement for Rev. 2.
A revised Vol. 5 will be the product.
Also see response to original RAC coment J.10.g.
Compensatory Plan Note:
The " Compensatory Plan" is not a separate plan it is an extension of the implementing procedures.
The stack of information which was submitted for FEMA review as " Appendix L" has been pulled apart and Integrated in appropelate locations of the RERP for Rev.
1.
The bulk of it is contingency procedures for the CD Local Lialson personnel.
Other agencies with compensatory responsibilities have addenda that note these responsibilities.
A.2.a "Section 1.3 of Vol.1. Including Table 1.3-1 and Table 1.3-2 app ly to the compensatory situation as well as to the " normal" emergency response. No additional matrix is needed.
Also see the Introductory note for the Com-pensatory Plan.
A.2.b There la no separate legal basis for compensatory actions. Vol. I Section 1.12 applies.
A.4 The rosters of personnel available for emergency response will be reviewed and amended as necessary for Rev.
2.
It is likely that new rosters will be compiled for NHCDA and Rockingham County Sheriff's Department.
Llkowise, the list of bus drivers and ambulance drivers that have been tralned for emergency response will be made available for FEMA review along with Rev. 2.
E.1 The of rector has Impilcitly delegated this authority and responsibility to the IFO Controller.
This is appropelate since the IFO Controller is nearest the area in which coordination of compensatory actions may be necessary. If a town is unwilling or unable to respond there is no decialon to be made.
Compensatory activity must be undertaken.
1256/2223h
-l-
E.7 EBS message texts, including those for a
" compensatory situation", wIii be p1 aced In Vo l.
1, Appendix B.
These metrages will be reviewed and updated for Rev. 2.
The bus routes, with and without activation of compensatory activity, will be the same.
The bus route maps will be available for review for Rev. 2.
The one phone number given is a progressive ring-down number.
Several lines are available for call-in for service.
F.I.a The Rockingham County procedure will be amended to provide for notifying NHCDA promptly of non-participation of any municipality.
F.2 No response.
H.3 Space available, and telephones available for local liaison activity will be expanded.
H.4 See response A.4 H.ll Additional phones will be added.
Enough
~
phones to accommodate 12 local liaison officers and several incoming calls simultaneously will be provided.
J.10.a Maps of bus routes are being prepared for all 17 towns. They will be incorporated in Rev.
2.
Also see response to E.7.
J.10.d Lists of persons with special needs will be added to the Local Liaison Procedures for Rev. 2.
The Hampton need for resources is being reviewed.
A new estimate of demand and resources available will be added to the CD Local Liaison Procedure, to the local trangortation coordinator procedures and to the Special Facility Plans for Hampton Uppendix F of the Hampton Plan).
1256/2223h l
J.10.g Strip maps and directions for buses are being developed. These will provide direction to the State Staging Areas at Rockingham County and in Portsmouth. Additional maps will be generated to provide routes to the local staging areas.
Likewise, local bus route maps are being compiled. These maps will be issued with Rev. 2 and cited in the plan.
Maps will be compiled for each community.
J.10.J Troop A Procedures will be augmented with descriptions of the process for obtaining additional manpower for access and traffic control.
Estimates of auxillary personnel, by agency, will be included.
J.10.k The EOC Resource Coordinator Procedures will be revised to provide for dispatching tow vehicles to the State Staging Areas.
X.3.a Dosimetry for bus delvers will be handled the same as that for local emergency workers.
Dosimetry will be issued from the State Staging Areas. The doslmetry issued will be Identical to that issued to other emergency workers. The process for handling dosimetry distribution is described in the Rockingham County Sherif f's Department Procedures, Rev.
1.
Similar procedures will be developed for the State Staging Area in Portsmouth for Rev.
~
2.
K.3.b Dose record maintenance is included in Rev. I of the Rockingham County Sherif f's Department procedures.
Troop A, New Hampshire Department of Trans-portation, and National Guard Procedures will be amended to reflect issuance of dosimetry and maintenance of dose records in Rev. 2.
0.1.b Vol. I Section 3.2 will be revised to reflect special training for compensatory actions.
P.7 No response.
P.8 Asstated in the introductory note the
" Compensatory Plan" is not a plan.
It Is a series of addenda to procedures. The addenda will be noted in a revised cross reference to the plan, but no separate cross reference is planned.
1256/2223h -. - - _
Seabrook Plan A. l.b See response. to Hagton A.1. b.
SImi1er changes will be Implemented for Seabrook.
E.6 See Hegton E.6 response.
J.IO.J See Hampton J 10.J response.
K.3.a See Hampton K.3.a response.
t
't i
i i
4 1
s i
l i
i I
i i
1 i
0 J
t 1256/2226h Hampton Plen A. I.b The Fire Chief Procedures and Appendix G will be amended to ref lect the responsibi lities f or stren activation for early closure of the oesches (i.e., Rockingham County has primary responsibi lity).
E.6 The Fire Department has backup responsibility for stren activation (prima ry is Rockingham County). It has no responsibility for beach patrols.
The pubile address systems - the voice are activation of the strens.
J.10.J Beach closure traf fic control points need not be Identical with the standard traffic control points.
Note that traffic control points in IV-ll have been revised for Rev, l.
No additional change appears necessary.
K.3.a The RADEF procedures will be amended as suggested.
1256/2225h. _. - _ - _ _ _
+
DRED Procedures A.l.e Where possible alternate names and numbers wIi1 be added to the DRED Proportles CalI List (DRED Procedures, Appendix A).
A.4 DRED will " respond" to the extent possible given availability of personnel at its facilities at the time of the emergency. The response consists of notifying patrons of the facility and closing it.
These DRED employees are not members of the emergency response organization any more than the operators of private facilities are.
No change appears necessary.
D.3 No change necessary.
D.4 The Governor's declaration of a state of emergency is corollary to evacuation of the beaches. DRED procedures and EBS messages will be reviewed and edited to reflect this.
E.5 This is not necessary in the DRED procedure.
Rockingham County Dispatch or local Fire Chiefs, at the discretion of NH(LA, handle siren activation.
This is spelled out in their procedures (e.g.
see p.
IV-15 of Seabrook Plan).
E.7 DRED personnel will close their facilities and suggest that departing patrons tune to EBS for instructions. This will be noted in an amendment to the DRED Procedures.
No messages are to be issued by DRED, nor are they expected to have any role in activation of public alerting equipment or systems.
J.9 Procedures for closing non-State beaches will be added to Appendix G of the Hampton and Seabrook Plans.
J.10.g DRED procedures will be amended as suggested. Means for providl'g Information to patrons will be expanded.
1256/2224h -
+
4 K.3.a,b See response to A.4 above. DRED personnel will be evacuating as they close their facilities. They are no more at risk than the public.
i O.4 No training is anticipated.
The task requires no unusual or special technical activities.
l t
b k
~
I a
)
l i
4 L
t l
1256/2224h j
07/02/1986 10:38 NHCDACONCORD NH 603 225 7341 P.02 STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE G
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT New HampsMre Civil Defense Agency Sme. Offee Park Sout%
107 Pleasone Street Censord, New HompsNro 03301 JOHN H. $UNUNU Governor 5
RICHARD H. STROME CM'or JAMf$ A. SAGGIOTES July 1, 1986 Dem Dirumt Mr. Henry G. Vickers, Regional Director Federal Emergency Management Agency Region 1 J.W. McCormack Post Office and Courthouse Boston, Massachusetts 02109 Attn: Mr. Edward A. Thomas
Dear Mr. Vickers:
Attached are several doctnents that cortprise the Work Plan for Revision 2 to the New Hampsnire Radiological Emergency Response Plan (NHRERP). They -
represent tne State responses to each Regional Assistance Committee (RAC)
~
question with comment added. The State responses are a direct result of the
' working sessions with the RAC on June 23 and 24 and represent the agreements reached on each topic during our working sessions. More detail has been added to State responses where the RAC suggested expansion, but none of the conceptual agreements have been modified.
We are proceeding with the modifications necessary to issue this working version of the NHRERP based upon this Work Plan. Acccrdingly, we request that you review these documents at your earliest convenience and provide a confirmatory statement indicating that we are reflecting work products accurately within those areas where the RAC feels additional planning is required.
If there are any areas where the Work Plan needs to be expanded to reflect the agreements reached in our work sessions, we are preparea to make the suggested revisions immediately.
In any event, we shall submit Revision 2 on or about August 25, 1986.
Thank you for your continued support of our off-site emergency planning efforts for Seaurook Station.
Sincerely, Richard H. Strome Director RHS/sjc Attachments l
l 36348 Emergency Management for New Hampshire
RAC REVIEW OF THE MUIIICIPAL (HOST COISEUlllTIES)
RADI0tACICAL EMERCENCY RESP 08BSE PLAllS FOR SEAB800Et (Revision dated 11/55)
APR 3 0 086 rese L of 1 a
RAC Commenteleecommendation state nesponse Action mAC Evel ation of state aesponse Ad[.aN g,,
(A)
Complete 8
- I eq inade-(C) 17 is the StateW'em o
a position thet Host Comunu-
,W quote Incomplete ww it es alty plans are not a basic requirement of o
(I)
(1) ee 2M NUREG 06S4 Rev. T The local requirements gg cited in the criterle apply to munici alltles within the EPZ for the most part.
he Host Communit y
- plans, therefore, have been A.I.a (m!! host unanicipalttles)
A cumpiled principally with crlterls J. 6 0.h.
J.12 and K.S.b in eind.
A.I.h (all host mantcipalttlee)
A No response necessary.
A.I.c (all host municipalities)
A No response necessary.
A.l.d Personnel in charge of the EOC A
No response necessary.
operetton have been designated in the Plan.
( All heet municipelttlee.) In Mencheeter and Nashua, clartitcation Clarification of the roles of the Board of te needed on the roles of the Board of Aldermen and the Mayor will be provided in 2 of N Manchester and Nashes plans.
v.
Alderme.s and the Mayor, respectively.
4.1.e There le no evidence in the plan that 1
This requirement does not apply to the host comunicot ton links can be manned 24-communities. The host cont.uns t ges. ho.ever, hours per day (all host municipalt-do meet it.
A clarification of this capability will be added to section Il-e of ties) host plans.
4.2.s ARC and SA representatives are on the EOC staff. Hou are they nottfled? A clear and coactee seamary description N tifications of MC and SA,ellt be added to the Civil Defense Director a procedures at of appropetate functione in thle p.111-5 in Rev. 2.
critetton should be included as a kW
.e
- RAC REVIEW OF THE 19UIIICIPAt. (NOST COIGIUIIITIES)
RADIGIACICAL EMERCENCY RESPOIISE Pt.ANS FOR SEARROOK APR 3 01986 (Revision dated 11/85) page 2 et 11 E
Response
Remedial RAC Ceements/ Recommendation O.
State Response Action O
RAC Evolustion of State Response Adequate Action j 'd
.}
}{
(A)
Ceaplate 4 g[
yg
- g Inade-(C) g; gu quote race-plete g
a=
.g (t)
(t)
A.2.e table with functions on one ante and Cont'd esencies on the other in an appendte
( A.2.e).
(att host municipalttles)
A tale with functions for egencies will be added to Section 14e.
Consideretten should be given to having a communicottone officer on the EOC etsff.
(Manc hes t er. Rochester.
Nashua)
A.2.b It would be beneficist if the spectfte A
summary of the legal authority for host authorttles given to the towns were summertaed. (Manchester. Washua)
A.3 A signature page should be included in I
orence to the State leMers of agreement en appendis for the INGS. OPHS* and the will be made in Section 1.G.
IRsCDA.
Written agreemente should be included for local bue and sabulance No signature page is anticipated, nor are agre.e,me.nts.,ulth,es, ate egencies required.
st compaales, private schools. ARC. SA, t.g gg
.tu and ecceptance of the plan colleges, hospitale arid any other by the Governor precludes the need for
'F " ' 'Y " d**' * "*''
prieste support orgenlaattone.
If aesiiabie eiseul.e re, t i,e iocai
,i.n
= r,e ',ye = -, 'r oos, *,'ren's-a shouid reference these doca. ente and uhere they can be f ound ( A.1).
(all Seperate agrennents obtelned by the host
- "'*"I**
*"Y '' D*
- host manicipalttles) of such agreements provided.
RAC REVIEW OF TME MUNICIPAL (HOST C0eseUNITIES)
RADIOIACICAL ENERCESICY RESPoll5E PLANS FOR SEASROOK (Revision dated II/as)
APR 3 01980 pese 3 et 11
~
e O
jE Besponse Remedial RAC Commente/ Recommendation O.
State Response Action O
RAC Evaluation of, State Response Adequate Action ej l*
(A)
Complete
$l j,
- {
Inede-(C)
.o
, mete i
iete R"
3 ~E Ew (I)
(I) mo A.4 The person responsible for continuity I
of eperettone should be specified by title.
It appears that thle person to identified in each plan.
To remove any doubt this should he stated under
, $*o*'M *' b
' ' " **C h h*** P'**
his respone tbilit tee on page I-85.
(all heet municipalttles)
C.I.e.
Licensee and State N/A No response necessary.
C.I.b C.I.c Licensee and State N/A No response necessary.
Local plane should indicate the federet asetetence util he attitred in any significant event.
(att host l
municipalttlee)
C.2.e.
Licensee and State N/A Ne response necessary.
C.2.6 c.3 Licensee and State N/A No response necessary.
Nouever, see comment under A.).
1
a t
a t
3 cnt e
1 io:
l) dil) pI f
et pCm(
o mcm( o eA o c
R C
n I
4 eg ee a
st P
na ee eu)dt) pqA en1 ee( me(
ed I g BA esnep ee 6
B 89 e
1 ta 0
t
,S 3
fo R
P n
o A
i tau la e
v E
C A
K R
O
) O S R E G I A
$O* {u o TE I S
.%O TU*.2m NUR MO MF OCS n
st e
l a
ss h
l )
eo t
TA5 ch S t 8 f
o n
DP/
o' re IH e
pn k
1 E i" of l
t
( E1 l n
.e o
n S
g LNd n
A O e o
t io f
P P t i
o a8 (e)
- f a
t s
r I S a t
c-e a
i1f1 u
S" yl sr CEd c
c n
I R A
e ode" d '*
itn l*c N
n UY e e
oo MCl s
ni aor N e n
h t
sp' t
t ec EEi o
he HC v p
eie' y
y y
y tS y
TR e s
r r
r r
'g r
S t
a Bs P
r ER e
a a
a
, n#
f a
R M(
R s
s s
s g
e s
E'r N t
d* i' o OE s
s s
s s
o e
e e
e e
d e
f y n
ne c
oa"N c
c c
c WI t
e e
e e
i# od n
e ii n
M E A a
n n
n n
N g*
tv s
I C t
e ao e
g VI S
e e
e e
r*,
',b*
n s
E C s
s s
R A o
o o
o
- ,d icr s
n n
n n
p n
ite f
o tf p
s t
p p
p p
ie.s i ef I[g e s
Co s
s s
s rb lh*
i*
Al e
e e
e a
s e
,f lcll o ba
[*i#AepN RD r
r r
r t n r c
A t
l a en R
o o
o o
o N
N N
N n
1M
.h**m A
A A
/
/
A A
/
A d
.},*E N
N N
e e - nt
.t n
st ot r oe api a e ne M o t (
v w
/ oa e
t nh c w
e n
o t
o eb t
i a,
d H
a o
i i t
t n
e u
3 p
t v r h t
a a
A e
oi
. s o s d
c nt s nn a n
r e,
c e o N
RA e
e S y e l i m
d l
f t t
,d m
n e
r f
t ae n o
u h, a e i t t a c
t C e e sa p
t r e
t R
e )s R
n
,A i
S e
/
eb c
t e
e n
e t
l i S e
t n
e
,t ot nRh e s
t a
n e s et l uE t h n
t o
r e c l
m i c e
S c
el m
d e
a v n t r e p t
a m
d e
l t
r f
o n
e A
i s
i a
o M
C e
s t t c
o t
i h
n r f cs C
e e
oauy n e
e o A
e r
e s
f me n e
l gt f B
s e
s h e s
l ns n
v n
d n
ait s t
e e
e ree t
e t e n c
u c
A A
arl e
c r an w i
e i
/ /
oa af e i
ot oo L
N L
N N
RCt i h L
PS ct E
4 8
3 4
,2 e
2 34 S.
R Ahu C
D E
E D
D D
E E
E
RAC REVIEW OF THE MURICIPAL (HOST C0000 UNITIES)
RADIOIACICAL EMERCESICT RESPONSE PLA10S FOR SEARROOE APR 3 01986 (Revision dated 11/85, Page % of I1 a
.jE
Response
Remedial RAC Comts/ Recommendation d.
State Response Action O
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action
.j l*
(A)
Ceeplete d'**fl j*
0{
8 In de-(C) o,
.E u quote Incomplete E ~E E =.
(I)
(I) so R.6 Licensee. State, and EPZ communttles N/A No response necessary.
R.7 F.I.a-The plan should spectly the primary.
I F.I.e secondary. and backup communtentione systems to be used for each supposting organisation.
A diagram shoutng A diagram sho.Ing coseaunications link s alll communicatton links should be in-he adood to Section Il-C of each host plan.
cleded. (att host municipalttles)
F.I.f Licensee N/A No response necessary.
F.2 The Plan should specify the primary.
I secondary, and backup cuamunicettune systee to be used for each supporting organisetton.
A disgram shoutng communicatione links should be S** P" I "* ""'
included. (all host municipalttles)
F.3 (all host municipalltles)
A ffo response necessary.
RAC REVIEW OF THE MUNICIPAL (HOST COMMUNITIES)
RADIOtACICAL EMERCENCY Resp 0NSE PLANS FOR SEABROOK APR 3 01986 (Revision dated 11/85) page L of 1 e
j 'O Beepense Remedial RAC Comments / Recommendation State Response Action RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action
- 1 (A)
Complete 3
-I
{
Inade-(C) 6 h
.,o
,uste i - iete MG 3
(t)
(I) g Iw mo C.l.
The plan deals only with dissemination A
No responsa necessary.
C.2 of information for the public during an emergency. If the State is solely section 14-0 appears clear on public responethle f or public education. the
!"s'
$,' $ N* [ EP' met I ls w ll local plan should eeke thlo clear.
made evallebte to host community EOCs.
Coptee of public information and educational brochures should be on hand at the EOC and preferably be part of the plar..
C.1.a.
Generally adequate for local responet-A No response necessary.
C.4.a.
bt!!ttee.
C.4.b C.4.c The State rumor control number in the A?
Rumor Control numbers elle be revle.ed for
"2" Manchester and Nashua plane should be checked for accuracy.
C.5 The plans should state that A
They do, at Section ll.D.
Informational progrees for the news media are a State responalbtlity.
M.3 Adequate.
A No response necessary.
H.4 Adequate.
A No response necessary.
t
RAC EEVIEW OF TNE MUNICI. ;L (HOST Col 00UlllTIES)
RADIOIACICAL EMERCENCY RESPO M Pl Alls FOR SEARROOr (Revision dated 11/85)
APR 3 01986 Page 7 of 11 j 'O m
E
Response
Remedial RAC Comments / Recommendation Oe State Response Action RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action
.j i*
(A)
Complete h
3 *er au{
U Inade-(C) a 3,
er e quote incomplete
==
(I)
(1)
Q 3~
mo W.7 Not applicable.
N/A No response necessary.
n.80 Adequate.
A No response necessary.
N.lt Plan should have an appendis I
identifying emergency equipment Eawrgency owlpeent and personnel resources 7 ( cos wl H W addas to the host plans including survey meters, communica-stone equipment, and emergency supplies and their locations.
N.82 N/A N/A No response necessary.
I. 7, N/A N/A No response necessary.
I.5 J.2 N/A N/A No response necessary.
J.9 J.80.a J.10. b The population data in the Manchester A
Pbpulation data has toen updated at p.
I-10 and Nashua plana shoestd he checked for of Rev. l.
accuracy stnce population data in auc-coastve plan reviate no la different even though the reference for thle data to the ease in both plan re-visions.
O
RAC REVIEW OF THE MUNICIPAI. (HOST ColeeUNITIES)
RADIGIACICAL EMERCENCY RESPONSE plJutS FOR SEARpOOK APR 3 0 tone, (Revision dated II/RS)
'e Pete a of Ii m"
Response
Remediat RAC Co m te/Reconmendation d.
State Response Action "O
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action
< = *
- E
.I 1*
(A)
Ceeplete "1 K S
Imede-(C) u Eu quote f acomplete av
=
- 3 Iw (I)
(I) mo J.10.c N/A N/A No response necessa 7 J.10.d Several concerne were taleed erith the I
Manchester and Nashua plane and should be addressed. These includet 8.
Stating the capacity of the VA (6) The capacity of the VA lbspital alla to
- 8
- 88 4
- Neopitet in Manchester.
2.
Detailing the facilities needed I
and avattable for communteles (2) This information will be reflected in
+a.
a c' ai 'acii rata r 'haa In the host plans. 'tv piaa
eer.ed by N.shua (e.g.,
patiente from the Seacoast Health Center la Nampton).
3.10. e.
N/A N/A No response necessary, f.80.f.
- f. 4 0. g J. to. h Relocation / mass care factittles have I
been identifled and are far enough f ree the ette, however, their capacit y to seree the sesigned population le in certous doubt. More spectitcally, the
RAC REVIEW OF THE MUtilCIPAL (NOST COBRIUNITIES)
RADI0tACICAL EMERCENCY RESP 00tSE PLANS FOR SEARROOK (Revision dated 11rRs)
APR 3 01986 Page 9 of _Il a
0
$E
Response
Remedial RAC Co m te/ Recommendation d.
State Response Action "O
BAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action i
A **
.j
]*
(A)
Complete f
j *,
u{
Inade-(C) 3,.,
,e
.,u quote Incomplete E
(I)
(I) g 3-mo J.10.h following concerne have been raised in Cent'd the plans for Manchester and Nashua:
1.
In the Nashua
- plan, reception (Il I
Tame 2. p.14-18.
centers other than schools should be listed.
2.
The capacity of the VA Hospital in (2) The capacity of the WA hospital alli be Manchester which sheltere nursing home patiente should be addreeaed.
3.
The factittles needed and meall-(3) See Taele 2, Rev.
1.
Also see response able for communities served by 18ashua should be Iteted.
4.
The Manchester and Nashua plane "3 "** "" ""8'***#***'",
should describe the arrangemente shelter et the Reception Center whereby the school children util be fed at the host center (s).
5.
In the Manchester plan, a raat ac t person and alternate must be pro.
m w Tebte 2. hv. l.
vided for each f acili t y in order to aoeure that a knowledgeable D
M RAC SEVIEW OF THE MUNICIPAt. (HOST ColeculelTIES)
RADI0tACICAL EMERCENCY BESPoelSE Pl.ANS FOR SEA 0 ROOK (Revision dated 11/05)
AP9 3 01996 Page 10 of 11 a
^U jE
Response
Remedial RAC Comments / Recommendation O.e.
State Response Action
. O.
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action
,.gs
=1 2
(A)
Ce=,lete 6l 3g gg Inade-(C) me g g;
pu guste incomplete a
h 33 g;
(1)
(1)
J. 8 0. h person with authority has been Cont'd reached to coordinate facility use.
6.
In the Manchester and Nashua (6) The CD Director may
" *"*9qu i red be re to C*P" "
plane, the CD Director will not be
- ""rar'i l' o"n l y.
tego y
Thi s is contingency able to fulfill these duties if he planning to cover for lead time that may be m elred for the M pmv W le assigned as alternate Reception i
f ocIIIty manager to err 1ve.
Center Manager.
7.
In the Manchester and Nashua Disgrams of the Nanchester and Nashua plane, a complete diagram of the Reception Centers allt be added with Rev. 2.
layout of the reception center should be included shoutng reception and registretton areas, monitoring areas. decontamination areas with traffic flow. wetting
.,e
, et..
I J.IO.I Not eestuated in thle revleu.
N/A No response necessary.
l I
J.80.)
N/A N/A No response necessary.
(
J.10.k J.10.1
RAC REVIEW OF THE MUNICIPAL (NOST CoseeUNITIES)
RA010lACICAL EMERCEIICY RESPONSE PLAlfS FOR SEARROOK (Revision dated 11/ES)
APR 3 01986 Page II of 11 E
Response
Resedial EAC Commente/ Recommendation de State Response Action
}
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action y
e
- 1 3q (A)
Complete 3g aa 1T
- 5 Imede-(C) u yg g;
pu quote Incomplete R
25 M
(83 (83 J.12 There are severet concerne in the 1
Manchester and Nashua relative to contamination monitoring that should be addressed. These are:
1.
The Reception Center floor plan gi, 5,
r..punse J io.h.7.
ehould be included in the RER plan.
2.
The avettable resources to perfore t2) W responw to MI.
these functtone ( personnel and equipment) should be identitled and included in the plans.
K.1*
N/A N/A No response necessary.
K.1 L.1-The State metatatae a tiet of 1
,$,,",,*,$#neN, b, N, L. 4 quattfled medical support factit-s ties.
The local plan should provide 2.4.2.
It is g*,,,*,,*, *,,,, @ "'[.
for transporting redtoloRical acetdent Q*%"'*hf,[*
wictles should any appear at the reception center (L.4) and thle should be coordinated with the State.
(alt host municipalities)
RAC REVIEW Ot ici MUNICIPAL (110$7 COpeIUNITIES)
RADlotACICAL EMEstGE81CT RESPOIISE PIAIIS FOR SEASROOK (Revision dated 18/05)
APR 3 01986 Page 12 of 13
+.
E Response '
Remedial aC j "O RAC Evaluation of, tate Response Adequate Action RAC Casseents/Recommendetion Oe State Response Actiom S
y **
ej l.".
(A)
Complete gl 3g yg lande-(C) 4 e
g; 7u gente lace-plete gg (s)
(:)
R 3a M
M.5-State in cooperatton utth local. (all A
No response necessary.
- 98. 4 heet eenicipalttles)
N.1-Drt!!s and esercises are to be planned A
No response necessary.
N.5 and scheduled by the State and con-ducted under State superviolon. (att heet municipalttles) 0.l-Training is a State responalbtlity.
A No response necessary.
0.3 The ISICDA ulli conduct periodic training seestone uhtch are to be scheduled in cooperation with the local Civil Defense Director.
(all host municipalttlee)
P.l-The plan shows no one responsible for I
The planning ro w sibility elig h g% to P.10 the planntag ef fort (F.1-F.3).
This the Civil Defense Director.
This.181 be
'# 8
- 0 '"
- 2*
should be included.
The plan does.
however, adequately provide for plan updating and change distributton.
An appendte listing by title the A listing of applicable state procedures will procedures for implementing the plan be referenced in Section lie of the host should be included (F.7).
RAC REVIEW OF THE MUNICIPAL (NOST ComUWITIES)
RADI0tACICAL EMERCENCY RESPONSE PLANS POR SEABROOK (Revision dated 11/85)
APR 3 01986 Page 13 of I3 l
jE Beepense Remedial RAC Comments /Recomumendetion State Response Action O
RAC Evaluation of State Roopense Ade,este Action 3-(a)
Ce=, set.
8l gI "g
Imede-(C)
.u se
..ete iete Tw (I)
(1) ao P.I.
Although the plan has a table of An 0654 cross reference =161 be added la P.IO contente, it to not crose refere4Ced Rev.
2.
Some discussion of which criterle Cont'd to NUREG-0654 criteria (P.8).
e
RAC REviEv OF Tut MuulCIPAL (Erz CosseuulTIEs)
RADIOtACICAL EMERCENCY RESPOI85E PLANS FOR SEABROOK APR 3 01986 (Revision dated 11/81) e.se L f n
=
R..,.ese Re.edi.:
j 'O
~
RAC Comments / Recommendation b
State Response Action RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action I es 1*
(A)
Coeytete j *h 0g 8
e Inede-(C)
.", u quote incomptete u
G (t)
(I) 3~
so A.l.a Plan identiftee appropriate response A
No regonse necessary, organisettone.
A. l. b The appropriate roles have been A
No response necessary, identitled.
A.l.c Organisettonal interrelattonehtpe are A
No response necessary, tilastrated in Fige. 3 and A.
Kingston Add p.
1-17 to crose reference tiet.
l Portementh. IIew Castle:
Change page eumbers in Appendia 0.
A.I.d Key dectelon enkere have been A
No response necessary.
identif'ed.
(Eseter. East Kingston.
Greenland. Maapton Falle. Kensington.
Hampton. New Fielde. Portsmouth. Rye.
Strathae)
RAC REVIEW OF THE MUltlCIPAL (EPZ COISIIRelTIES)
RADIOLOCICAL EMERCE18CY REspoleSE PLAltS FOR SEABRMK APR 3 01986 (Revision dated 11/85) 2 23 Page of a
.e.e a
Beepense Remedist Q*
,1 ]o RAC Evaluation of State Reepense Adequate Action RAC Cenoments/ Recommendation State Response Action w e g
3l
- 1 3q (A)
Complete as IT
=g Imh-(C)
U l]
pu quote lacomplete 2 f.
2%
(1)
(t) 4.1.e The plan does not spectitcally mantion i
II) Each local organlaation has 24-hour a 24-hour mottiteetton capability. le notif iest ion capability.
- Seabrook, the Police Dispatch Center manned 24-Hampton and Emeter have 24-hour
- g",,';t,;;~):'r%';g
-r
,er de,r (S...roo=,
., ton, u nt,.
ch.n.e.
In ct on sie of
..et in,eto.,
.ete,)
thew four local plans allt clarif y Ceementelee have 24-nour emeraency l
nottiteetton capabilities.
- However, (2) The notification trees in Section a l-e some additional ciertitcotton is of the plans for Brentwood, Greenland, Hampton Falls, Kensi ngton,
- Kingston, needed in identifying the orgentastion
- Newton, New
- httle, North Manp ton, l
structure (Brentwood, Greenland, No.fsetos, sbrtsmouth, south Hampton, Strathan and Ryo ella be cler1 fled.
9 Neopton Falle, Reneington, Kingston, beaten, llew Caette, North Hampton, New Fielde, Portoaseth, South Hampton, Stratham, Sye)
A.2.a Table 2 (p.
1-18) and Section II A
No rewonse necessary, delineate these functione.
(Brent-
- wood, Greenland, Maepton
- Falle, Renetneton, Kingston, Newton, South
- Mempton, Seabrook, Hampt on, East Kingston, Eseter)
i RAC REVIEW OF THE MUNICIPAL (Ep2 ColetUNITIES)
RADIOIACICAL EMERCENCY RESPONSE pl. Alls FOR SEABROOK APR 3 01986 (Revision dated 11/05) page of 23 I
e
Response
Remedial O
j *O RAC Cemeents/Reconsendation O.
State Response Action RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action I*
(A)
Ceeplete Tl j I
' u{
Inade-(C) u,,,
quote Incomplet e
- E E=
(I)
(I)
Nu so A.2.s la the event that suffletent volunteer Cont'd espport for EOC operetton te not avellable, comelderation should he given to developing procedures to have 6
dual responalbtittles for atenctee.
(all sentelpalttles) i A. 2. b Legal motherittee and statutes are A
No response necessary.
adequately referenced.
(all municipalities)
A. 3 See State plan Review (all 3
See State Plan A.h municipalities).
A. 4 Adequate in partg some poettione do I
Spemslu A for each laces plan.811 ne reviewed.
Those positions that regire not have a backey Itsted for second 24-hour staf f tg elle be Indicated. A mecond ehtte responetbattttes.
(att shiet name.t i s ne provided for each such P**'"*"*
municipalities) 1 c.l.a.
N/A N/A No resoonse necessary.
C.I.h
RAC REVIEW OF THE NUNICIPAL (EPZ Cope 8 UNITIES)
RADIOt.0CICAL EMERCFNCY RESPONSE Pl.ANS FOR SEABROOE O 4-(neension dated 11/85)
Page L of g E
Response
Remedial RAC Ceements/ Recommendation
,$ e State Response Atd e
'* O RAC Evolustion of State Response Adequate Action y "E
- j
}{
(A)
Complete gl 4
gg gg Inade-(C) gg g;
,u quote f acomplete g
3c g;
(!)
(I)
C.I.c A
4o response necessary.
C.2.s me local representatives are to report N/A No response necessery.
to the EOF (all municipalttles).
C.4 All requeste for outelde asetetance A
No response necessary, will be through NNCDA.
I.et t e rs of agreement to provide transportation and towing era shown as being in Appendte R.
but are actuelty in the entRERF Section 4.1.
(all municipelt-ties) 0.3 Emergency elsestiteetton levels are A
No response necesserv.
cenetetent with State and utility piene. (all municipalttles)
D.4 Procedores are in place that are A
No response necessary, constetent with emergency actione recommended by the nuclear facility licensee. (all amatclpalttles)
RAC REVIEW OF TNE tIUNICIPAL (EPZ ColeIUNITIES)
RADIOIACICAL ENERCENCY RESPONSE PLANS FOR SEARROO" APR 3 01986 (Revision dated 11/05)
Pese 5 og 23 a
e
-U jE
Response
Remedial RAC Causents/ Recommendation Oe State Response Action O
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action y"l g
ej IS (A)
Ceeplete 4
jg j{
Inede-(C) 8 g
g; pu quote Incomplet e 33 g;
(I)
(I)
E.8 Procedures for nottiteetton of A
No response necessary, reopense orgenteettone and checkitete are oestlebte. (ell municipelttles)
E*2 Methode for notifyinE key officlete in 7
The need to broaden notifications to hendte precautionary beech evacuations la these two Seebrook and Respton are not clear.
towns will be reviewed. Section Il-G la each sufficient personnel may not be plea vitt be apended to cover this alerted early enough to effectively l'
Perfore oeslgned inaction.
Procedures for eterting, notifying, and mobtilstas emersency response Personnet have been estestished for ett other usanicipeittles.
E.)
N/A N/A No response necessary.
E.4 N/A N/A No response necessary.
i RAC REVIEW OF Titt MUNICIPAL (EPE CopeeUlelTIES)
RADIOLOGICAL EMERCFMCY RESP 00tSE PLAstS FOR SEABROOK (Revision dated 81/85)
APR 3 01986 6
.g 23 Page e
o"
", g meopense Remedial RAC Commente/ Recommendation 5.
State Response Action
" 'O RAC Evelvetion of State Response Adequate Action A
]*
(A)
Complete
,I 8i "H
..3 Ime-(C) 6
,uate i - iete MC g
33 L
(s)
(1)
=
6o E.5 Public nottrication, uhtch to a State I
),[,,j,7,M
' b' "e reopensibility, has been described.
dIstrl t o
b Rouever, more informatson is needed on saaed so Appenals c of each local plan.
the distributton of tone-elert redtoe and procedures for setetcing new huolmesses and residences.
(all municipalities) See State Plan RAC review coment.
g.7 Preuritten 335 messages are a State f
Messages are not incluaed in local plans.
respoestbility and are listed in the See State Plan. E.7.
IRIRERP. (att municipalttles) r.l.a The plan does not spectitcally mention 1
a 24-hr meaning of communie et ton timbe M, ann,,ing o,,f,commu,ni,ca, tion,, links,o,n a,,24,-ho,,ur
,p 3,,
for Seabrook, Mempton, East Kingston, Seabrook. % ton, East Kingston, and Emotor.
and teeter.
For all other municipal-tttee, provisions are in place for 24-hour notification capability.
F. I. b Commercial telephone, local dispatch A
No rewonse necessary.
redte natuork, and Civil Defense Radio network all provide for edequate emergency communicottone capability.
For South Maapton, change page number in Appendia D.
(All municipalities)
1 1
RAC REVIEW OF THE NLFICIPAL (EPZ CoseeUNITIES) i RADIOtACICAL ENERCENCY RESPONSE PtANS FOR SEARROOK (Revision dated 11/85)
APR 3 01986 I
Page of 23 4
jE
Response
Remedial RAC Ceemments/ Recommendation d.
State Response Action O
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action 1e
$l
.I i*
(A)
Complete "di 3,5 e
4a
! =h-(C) n, geste incomplete g
3 ~:
o>
os mo P.I.c State responelbllity. (AlI municipal-A No response necessary, tttee)
F. I. d State responetblitty. (All municipal-A No response necessary.
+
telee)
F.I.e The procedores and equipment for A
No response necessary, i
elettig and activating emergency j
personnel are adequate. (All munt-
)
ctpeittles)
F.B.f N/A N/A No response necessary.
F.2 Communication with medical support A
No response necessary.
factittles are over t he HEAR network.
(All ment c t ral t t les).
(Croce reference pages should be changed in
- Newton, Heepton, and Emeter.)
e
RAC REVIEW OF THE MUlllCIPAL (EPE ColerJulTIES)
RADIOLAJCICAL EMERCENCY RESPONSE PIANS FOR SEARROOK (Revision dated 11/85) 8 et 23 Pare a
e
. J*
"E Reopense Remedial RAC Ceementa/Recommendetion 5.
State Response Action
" 'O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action A*
l*
(A)
Ceeplete Il "h *e
?,$
s Inede-(C) quote Incomplete 3~
(I)
(I) mo F.3 Plan states that communication 2
s,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
egetpoent to tested at least monthly.
frequency of testing for the evolble e lect p[Se of whIch sV the tone etert radios are a The mechantee for testing and metatsining tone-elect radios is not described. Some clarity te needed in Frequency of connunications drills is noted regards to the scheduling of drille In Table 6 ISection Il-Ki of local plans as for egetpoent check. (All municipall-as in bl.1, Section 3.6.2 of the State p
ties)
C.l.
9teseetnation of public information Ig 1
Coples of EPl ella be included in the $tgte C.2 primertly a State responetbtitty.
Plan. which is avaliable et each local tw.
En tre copies are also avalleble for floweee r, copies of brochuren distribution fran each local EOC.
No e
stickers, etc., should be evallable in medition of EPl materials to the local plans, P*'***'**#*
the local plane.
- .3.a.
A media center has been established A
No response necessary.
C.4.a.
and will be staffed by State G. 4. b.
personnel. Perttelpetton by the local G.4.c.
community to at the discretton of the C.S Selectmen.
If this to done, the Selectmen are to notify the media center of their intention to hold a briefing and of the nature of the briefinR.
and to pruvide advance copies of any wettten releases.
RAC REVIEW OF THE MUNICIPAL (Ep2 CoseIUNITIES)
RADIOLOCICAL EMERCENCY RESPOIISE PLANS FOR SEARROOK (Revision dated 11/85)
APR 3 01986
,,, 23 O
- e go
Response
Remedial
~
RAC Ceements/ Recommendation Oe State Response Action
,O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action
,ma u
e 35 1
(A)
Complete g
g;
-gg ined.-
(C) g 3g u
quote incomptete 3,C.
gg (1)
(1) n.3 All local plane provide for the I
t o wtim IFE of tw % ton Plan ellt be establiehtng of en EOC.
However, at modified to reflect the source of the asepton
- ROC, the source of
""*'9*"C F P "*'*
emergency power should be stated.
- Also, et the Seahrook
- EOC, the
( 2) As noted an the special Facility Plan cepecity to shelter Adame Campground
- E' hos'e' d"**g*, *#,Y yN [$,"
- "d e
ne coopero should be stated, along utth former la the primary protective action, the IaMer is fw contingency purposes detailing the process for handling onsy. This elal be noted in a revision evacuees such as registretton to the special facility p lan (p. F.5-2 of Seabrook Plan).
procedures, security, etc.
II. 4 All local Eoce will be activated at A
No response necessary, the Site Area Emergency or higher claselftestion.
si. 7 postmetry equipment to stored at the f
RAttr of t3cer s procedures ella be sugeented e
amitional obtainlyorence local EOC.
Specific procedures should to reflect seens tw re ta dosPnetry.
Appropriate be defined on how and when supple-oongtoring techniques described in the DPHS mental equipment would be obtained procedure. well be ad,ded to RADEF Officer f ree telCDA.
The use of survey meters should be diocessed in the local
- plane, especially with. regards to personnel monitoring eM, espoeiere control.
r-9
)
l
-4
RAC REVIEW OF THE MUIIICIPAL (Ep2 ConMtNIITIES)
RADIOIACICAL EMERCENCY RESPOIISE PLANS Folt SEABROOK (Revision dated 11/85)
APR 3 01986 10 23 page of a
e aU UE
Response
Remedial RAC Commente/ Recommendation Oe State Response Action RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action y
' gg
- g e, q (A)
Ceeplete g
I yg yg Inede-(C) g g;
pu quote incompl ete JS g;
(t)
(I)
M.10 The RADEF officer to responetble for A
No response necessary, storage, inventory, and operational checho of emergency equipment /
Instruments. Calibretton to performed annually by IniCDA.
Procedures for repairing, replacing, and recalt-brating energency equipment should be included.
a.it Appendia C gives an adequate listing A
No pubile distribution of fuel la planned.
of emergency equipment.
Include All State and local agencies involved in emergency response are well aware of the information identifying sources of sources of fuel for government vehicles that vehtete feel during an ener.tency when they worste. This In m* necessary.
commercial factittlee may not be evallebte.
N.t2 This to a State function.
A No response necessary.
RAC REVIEW OF THE MUWICIPAL (EP2 CoseEUNITIES)
RADIOtACICAL ENERCENCY RESPONSE Pt.ANS FOR SEASROOK (Revision dated 11/05)
APR 3 01986
,, t i,, 23 e
Response
Remedial j0 RAC Evolustion of State Resposee Adequate Action RAC Cs,emente/Reccamendation State Beepense Action Ie
]*
(A)
Ceeplete
-I
- {
Inede-(C) 8 e
/s h*
quote Incomplet e a
.,u (l)
(l)
WG 3 ~=
so g
I.F.
Racet communttles have no direct A
No response necessary.
l.8 responettilities for accident esseeement; this to a State function.
- Mouever, the State may wish to consider using properly trained local EOC personnet to perfore field monitoring fonettone et their respective EOCs to esetet the State monitoring tesse in the tracking of a plume.
The use of survey meters with regards to personnel monitoring and exposure control should eleo be discussed.
J.2 Town of Seabrook only 1
Other toceltites A
No regonse necessary.
Seabrook must consider the topect of p,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,c,,,,,,
Seabroek ette evacuation of evacuation et P. 61-31.
noneseential employees on the town evacuation and the influs to emergency workers to t*w atte.
Cantdinettan of these actiettles should be errenged In advance with the ette end with letCDA to sintette tapacts.
RAC REVIEW OF THE MUlliCIPAL (EP1 C0181 UNITIES)
BADI0tACICAI. EMERCENCY RESPONSE Pt. Alls FOR SEARROOK (Revision dated 11/85)
Page I2 of 23 j$
Response
Benedial RAC Ceements/ Recommendation State Response Action O
RAC Evolustion of State Response Adequate Action x
.-I iA>
C.mpi.te 8g N
inade-(C)
I ~:
a quote Incomplete 03 un mo J.9 frenoportetton and sheltering I
TMs WhewhMwMM errengemente for transtente needs to the local plans as well en la vol. 1 Section be addressed more completely.
For 2.6.5.
The m olmetor elli provide for only those transients with out transportetson.
esemple, the CD Otrector to respon*
This is expected to be a very small number of elble for providing transportation and peese that can be handled on en ad hoc basis.
ehelter for treestente.
Mowever, how does he find these people?
Also, the Evacuation of local EOCs is addressed la the Selecteen's procedure le.g. Seabroom Plan, relocetton of municipal EOCs should be Rev. 1. p. IV-61 Evacuated emerge discussed.
response mentrations reconvene e t Receptiot Center.
l.80.e Moet of thle meterial to in the State I
criterte for relocMing local EOCs ellt be plan.
However, the full-steed map developed.
These allt be cited in NCA showing evacuation
- routes, traffte control
- pointe, and other key facilities wee not present in the A new pocket esp.114 be included in Rev. 2.
local plan.
P. L O. h The nep included in the local plane to A
No response necessary.
adequate.
RAC REVIEW OF THE MUNICIPA2. (EPZ ColeIUNITIES)
RADIOLOCICAL EMERCENCY RESPOIBSE PLANS FOR SEARROOK (Revision dated 11/85)
N 11 23 Page of
~
e m"
j *$
Response
Remedial RAC Consents /Ilecommendation 5,
State Response Action O
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action
,v
.a I *.
(A)
Ceeplete 3[
-1 8
- e In de-(C) 6a
};
.",0 quote Incomplet e
=
G 2 ~:
L (t)
(O mo J.50.c Trenetente are not spectitcally 1
The audible alert system provides coverage identified and discussed in thle for seasonal and transient pe ulations.
section of the plan. More information There is no large transient population beyond the siren coverage area.
to needed or a etetement that seasonal trenetente do not frequent the area See State Plan J.10.g d4 and the jaettitcotton for thle gtate-east.
Furthermore, evacuation A map ellt be included in the special procedures of facillttee which require f acility plan for Adams Cowground.
tong leed times in terne of being able to eeacuate or close down should be discussed (e.g.,
dog track, special evente such as county faire, cheetcal or power production industry, etc.).
Also, a esp for the Adees Campground in Seabrook should be developed.
1.10. d Information should be included I
til Section Il-G of the local plans elli be Ndd,
d**'"9 demonstrating that procedures are in place to regularly opdate lists of i
reeldents with special needs.
When i
82) m developed. does thle list retlect k
h o il aEedon I
current patiente recently released an se hoc basis en they call in to E0ca from hospitals that require special tc request assistance.
short-or long-tere care?
RAC REVIEW OF THE MUNICIPAL (EPZ COIGl UNITIES)
RADIOLOGICAL EMERCENCY RESPollSE PfANS FOR SEARROOK APR 301986 (Revision dated !!/81) 23 Page,, of E
Response
Remedial RAC Ceements/ Recommendation state Response Action at mAC Evaluation of State Response Adequete Action
,j"c 3j
}{
(A)
Ceeplete inade-(C) ggl gg
- g g,g 7u quete Inceeplete (1)
(1) g 33 gg 1.10.d Seoeral probleme with the Hampton plan
- ent'd should be addressed. These include:
I.
Discussing where pattente from the g,3 p%
Seacoast Meelth Center are seacoast Mealth conter are contained la W Special Facility,, plans for % ton.
relocated.
These are %pendix r of Rev. l for tne 7
Town plan.
2.
The adequacy of the number of beses allotted f or the number of (23 See response to State Plan RAC Comument On J 80 9-people requiring transportation.
3.
Plane regarding prisoner detention (33 plans fw handIlag pr1soners, If any during a severe accident.
= fit be maded to tne procedores for td Pbilee Chief in Rev. 2.
Finally, la the Seabrook plan, the potter to trenoport children home
I
"'**'*d******"
prior to sheltering or coacuation may ca'seby case basis.
In most cases early rtok stranding the chttdren at home release is i.nt i kely.
The State sakes reconeendations only.
Local school without a parent er guardian. le thte administrators allt uitlaately decide if action prudent during an escalating schools are to close.
emergency?
RAC REVIEW OF THE MUIIICIPAL (EPZ COBRIUlllTIES)
RAD 10tACICAL EMERCEleCY RESPONSE PIAles FOR SEARit00K (Revision dated 11/81)
Page 3% og 23 E
Response
Remedial RAC Ceammente/Recomumendation de State Response Action O
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action f
ej i,'
(A)
Ceeplete je U{
Inade-(C) 8 e4 Eu quote f accept et e u,
2 (I)
(I) 2~
mo p.sv.e.
Tne state nas sectaed not to use K1 A
No response necessary.
J.10.f for local emerRency workere stace se the upper limit of the PACS are approached, State emerRency workers wt!! replace thee.
J.10 3 The planning beste for relocation to I
Included in Rev.
6 based on householde that either own or laclud*d coad'r*'lon o' eark to home travel flee requirements (see p.
2-21 do not own an automobile. Considera-The study also exp lains that survey tion must be given to households that results demonstrate that a nisaber of g', ", g [,
do not have access to a f astly auto og during the day because the f astly car e=pected to occur during ewacuation.
to used for work.
Consideratton should be given to 3
estabitehtng bas routes in advance so 1
that reeldents will know where the stops will be instead of relying upon the Etee consuming door-to-door pick-up procedure.
The adequacy of the (2) The prearranged bus routf ng Concept la number of buses should be rewteved.
m ag ad,ted, see response to state l
The moveernt of the beach populattog Plan RAC Comunent. J.10.g.
should be reviewed.
RAC REVIrv 0F THE MUlIICIPAL (Ep2 CopeeUlstTIES)
Rant 0 LOGICAL. EMERCFMCT BESp00sSE pt.AI85 POR SEA 9 ROOK (Revienen dated 11/85) 16
,g 23 page e
~
"a $
Response
Remediat RAC Comments / Recommendation 5e State Response Action O 'O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action ej I ".
(A)
Ceeplete Inade-(C) f "h,*
O{
quote Incomplete U,
,u (1)
(1)
N ~3
=
ma 1.10.h Relocationheese Care factittles have I
The comment is addmssed in the response to been identitled and are far enough J.10.h of RAC Comments on the %st CGamunity from the ette. however. their capacity Plans. as well as in the response to J.10.h of the State Plan Vol.1.
to serve the sostgned population is in settoes doubt.
See review of host commentry plane for spectite detalle.
1.10.1 (No rettag)
Thte element use not evaluated in this review.
1.10.J Accese control to a responsibility of A
No reganse necessary, the M.M.
State police.
Houever. the local police may be limited in the oblitty to cover traffic control points.
e 1.10.k Generally. procedures for dealing with A
There are no "special traffic problees*
i lopediments to eencuatten routes are asalated with evacuatig the bogh.
It is i
desertbed in local plane. but the evacuated everv
.semend.
Traffic control
*"**'"*'**'**N'*6' special trafftc proble e sneetved vtah
- ' c"ht"raf f ic.
D*e Likewise Appendix F to NHCDA evacuating beach populations should be procedures outlines esamures for precautionary evocuation of beach areas.
eddressed in more detall.
w m
RAC REVIEW OF THE MUNICIPAL (EP2 COISIUNITIES)
RADIOLOCICAI. EMERCENCY RESPONSE PtJNS FOR SEARROOK APR 3 01986 (Revision dated 11/R5)
Page !? of 23 n
e g
Response
Remediet
}O w
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action i
RAC Cemeente/Recommendetion State Response Action 3
j*
(A)
Ceeplete
- },
inade-(C)
- g 3g a5 h
.u quote lacomplete L
(1)
(1)
- lc g
3~
so J.to.1 (No rating)
This element was not evaluated in this review.
J.12 This is a State and host community A
No response necessary.
responetbtitty.
K.3.s Roth self-reading and permanent record A
No reg onse necestery, doeteeters have been provided for (all municipalities escluding Neopton).
The number of desteeters in Heepton 1
Donimetry is ovellable for et t municipetltles are not adequate.
w i th,i n,,,the,,EPZ.,,D,os,leetW e, vel,la,ble to
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, gg.3g of the Hanpton Plan. Rev. 1.
E. 3. b The plan otetes that emergency workers A
No response necessary.
ehould read doelmetere every 15-30 minutes and report readings to the RADEF officer.
Conetderetton should be given to the seene of communication used by the emergency workers to report their readings to the RADEF officer. (all municipelttles)
RAC REVIEW OF THE leUNICIPAL (EPZ COIGIUNITIES)
RAO!OLOGICAL DIERCENCY RESPONSE PLA18S FOR SEASROOK (Revision dated 11/85)
APR 3 01986
,,,,,,, n
_O
Response
Remediat RAC Comments / Recommendation d.
State Response Action "O
RAC Evaluation of State Response Meetuate Action 7*
(A)
Complete aw 8
j*
au{
Inede-(C) e u,,,
quote incomplete
,, e u
2 (I)
(I) 3~
so l
K.4 It useld be helpful to list the dose A
timit values in the RADEF officer's 00**
888tt values offf be added to RADur procedures and/or recordkeeping forme to ettminate the need to search through the plan for these eelues.
(all mentetralttles)
K.S.a tavel for decontaminetton is A
Adoittonal inforestica re wired will be
- *d"Y**
established at 100 CFM above d
background.
Page numbers need to be
"* '* 8"9' '*9" ' '*d i chansed in the plan for some municipalities. (all matclpalttles)
K.S.b This to prleertIF a
State A
No response necessary.
responetbility. (all municipalttles)
L.I Adequate hospital factittles have been A
No response necessary.
arranged. (st! municipalttles)
L. 2, (N/A)
N/A No response necessary.
L.3
RAC REVIEW OF TNE NUNICIPAL (Ep2 CopequMITIES)
RADIOLOGICAL ENERCENCY RESPONSE PLANS FOR SEABROOK (Revision dated 11/85)
APR 3 01986
,,,,i, e, 2 3
.e.e RAC Cosomente/ Recommendation g,
State Response Action RAC Evaluation of State Response t
8 31 3q (A)
Complete 4
1Y gg leade-(C) 2G l%
pu quote Incompt et e E
3."
gy (1)
(I)
L.4 Transportation arrangemente have been A
No response necessary.
provided far in the plane for most amatcipalttles. Available transporta-tion modes and their capabilities should be included in all plane.
N.I Recovery and reentry critetta are
?
See response to N.I for state Plan review.
j vague.
Itowever, the dectaton to inttiste these actions rests with the State. (all municipatttles) i p.t.a.
Exeretoes have been provided for in A
No response necessary.
N.B.h the plan.
N.2.a.
Communications, medical emergency. and A
No response necessary.
l N.2.c, redtological senttoring drt!!e have N.2.4 been provided for in the plan.
(all municipalttles) 1.3.e-f All municipallttee.
A No response necessary, i
4
\\
i RAC REVIEW OF TME NUNICIPAL (EPE ColeIUNITIES)
RADlotACICAL ENFRCENCY RESPONSE PLANS FOR SEARROOK APR 3 01986 (Revision desed 11/85)
Page 20 of 23 e
oO
- E
Response
Remedial RAC Ceement s/Recommendat ion de State Response Action "O
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action A me (A)
Ceeplete 3l
'I'
- te Inede-(C) as
.,a quete
- nce.plete W
g 1
N (I)
(I) ao N.4 Adequate. (all municipallttes)
A No response necessary.
u.5 Clarification to needed regarding the frequency of eserctees.
0.1 Treintag progrene are included in the A
No response necessary.
local plan.
(Portsmouth.
S,mah j
nampton. Strathee. New Castle. New i
Pields. North Nampton)
- 0. l. b Training of indteldmate has been A
too response necessary.
proeided for. (all municipalities) 0.4.e Training of directors or coordinatore A
No response necessary, hee been progided for.
(e1I ountetpeltttee) 0.4.b This to a State responsiblitty. (all A
No response necessary, auntelpelttles) 0.4.c Tretning for redtological monitoring A
No response necessary.
and deconteetnetten of personnet has been proeided for.
(all municipelt-ties) i
e l
e t
3 ant e
2 ioe l) dil) pI f
et pCm(
o mce( o eAe c
R C
n I
I 2
eg ee a
st p
na ee ou)dt) pqA aoI se( nu(
ed i q RA esn 6
op 8
s 9
e 1
R 0
e t
3 a
t R
S P
fo A
no i
tau la v
E C
A K
R OO
)
R S
S E
A EO* {u o I
E T
S it
.j I0* 2s l
R U
I O
eF poS C l )
l A5
! L8 p P/
E 1
( E1 S
L Nd n
A O e p
o P t i
i S a C
t E d l
c ll R n
A U
Y o e
M Ci s
e s
tl n
Ei It C v op T
R e y
y y
y y
y s
E R r
r r
r r
r F M(
e a
a a
a a
a O E R
s s
s s
s s
s s
s s
s s
WL e
e e
e e
e e
c c
c c
c c
E A
t C
a e
e e
e e
e I
n n
n n
n n
V t
I E
S e
e e
e e
e C
s s
s s
s s
R D n
n n
n n
n C
o o
o o
o o
UO p
p p
p p
p A
I s
s s
s s
s R D e
e e
e e
e r
r r
r r
r A
R o
o o
o o
o N
N N
N N
N
-". h3* -
e A
A A
A A
A
.d.j,*3 d.
et sl l I r nd l t n r ut el et oee et a o c a c a n a f t d n a f
s(
i(
n(
t i n(
e v
o e e v o
r r
s l
eo s
n
.d o
y e e
e.
r b r r r
r s r e
i op e
i t d t
i d o o
p sf p
i nf f
n n a
r v a
y t.
oin d
u o f r n
c r d
cd r r p
e e
e p e
n e oo s ye) o a f
m s
d d ed pi e cb s m
t t gi p
r n e
g o
n a
r v u
e t
n u
c
. e e o s
l gst id e
e e e
n r d
er at n e R
cL) p l e n ehl t p E
i d
/
i s
s
/
ad n m e
ai s
l oe r n D n c1 o e p
r v t
o ai i e C e i e s
ei t o n
pht f e e
d o r
nc er e
i b) b)
e r) ef ot r p) s mps p oin s
m l
s r
m r ga r se ee e
t a e
p oal o oi r
i r nc m d
l o
o n i
f C
f i
f ht h t o
t oou n nt t
c t
i f ni f t rl aet C
h i g ee g ea g ea gesa b e l l t l el et l ei g
A g
n i
R a
a n np n np nb p nt n(
l p
f t
m i ni i ni i i i si a
i n
n oc n oc n
c n e t
c i et i si i st i i i n t ei e rt a r n a r n a sn a ed r i v n r i a r eu r ea r au r rno n a e m
T f(
T pm T pm T h m T t af I h a W
4 f.
s.
h.
]
5
,*{uIg 4
4 4
4 4
0 0
0 0
0 0
1
e l
e t
n ldil) p ent e
oe l) et pC m(
a mcm( o eA o c
R C
n I
n ee st
-ht) e na ou) p q A m o1 se(
u(
ed I q RA esnop M
se R
e t
0 a
t 3
S fo no i
tsu lov E
C A
K R
OO
)
R S B E
A EO* "
.o I
E T
S e* " T"
- 2m I
N R U
I O
SF IO S e
r b
C t )
o e
ZJ5 f
P/
5*
l t 8 l
P E
4 C
i 1
w A
( E1 P
R S
L Nd n
o h
s A
O e t
ti e.
o P
P t c
i S a d
e n2 IC t
e I
c d
e e.
E d r
R A
d u
e v N
n a
g f
U Y o o
eRe M Ci e
e la r
s b
i t
N s h
E n
l si Ei d
s H C v o
l y
y y
y y
y e
rd p
T r
o w R e iw' r
r r
r r
r s
ER W L e
as#
F M(
e a
a a
a a
a p
c e O E R
s s
s s
s s
d t
s s
s s
s s
e e
d red r
e e
e e
e e
t c
c c
c c
c e
t@
E A t
e e
e e
e e
e e
C a
m n
n n
n n
n n
I V
t
.d E IC S
g e
e e
e e
e e
Dn R O in*
s s
s s
s s
g a
n n
n n
n n
n L
i #'
o o
o o
o o
a led n
C O p
p p
p p
p h
e A
a s
s s
s s
s c
d=
I r
e e
e e
e e
e*
R D t'
r r
r r
r r
o pd n
A N
R e
o o
o o
o o
p' h
N N
N N
N N
A '
T e**
e,h*
.d."h 3
A A
A A
A A
A A
d d y.,
t e ee erh el d d k et i h u u t u t t l l po r
n c c o as o '
h e e n i
n n f
ii ct ci
)
n
)
)
)
)
)
)
r n
t s
o s
s s
s e
s e
ed t e
e e
e e
e a o e
d
)
a e
P r
d b np l
l l
i t
l d
ed s i
n t
am t
t t
t t
t ee e
i s f
r ld e
t t
l i
l t
t l i
v a e
ot l
eM l
l l
l l
l o
e r
a a
u r
d nt d
e e
e a
o e
e p
ol h p
p p
p p
p pt l i
c h
i et i i l
i t
i oe e
e e
c s
u c
c c
c e
c ni s e p i
R i
F o i i t
i i i e
F osi
/
n a
S n
nn m
m m
m i w n
n n
n n
b r
c e
u i
u e
u u
u a
i c
m r w r
m a
t d d e e u t e m
o l
d l
eN f l
l l
l l
l nN o a m
u e l
m l
l l
l l
l a
rD a
a a
a a
a op ml t
h p l
o
(
go
(
(
(
(
(
(
s a e C
nf a s
a t
n e ob(
i i C
t n5 d t
se A
e t 4 n e
e e
e e
e s aa i
R t
t e
e t
t t
t t
t i
C cd m a
r p
a a
a a
a a
l u
t. p u
u u
u u
u k f el e p
q A
q q
q q
q q
cf w) r ut e
e e
e e
e e
e eaee r os h t N y oh e M
h na M M M d
M M C s( R C s r A
T el C
,*IbMR 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
F P
P P
F F
F P
l!4l 1
l
!!lI ll
W RAC REVIEW OF Test tsUIIICIPAL (EP2 CoseeUNITIES)
RADIOLACICAI. EpsERCFNCY RESPONSE PUWS FOR SEASR00E APR 3 01986 (Revision dated 11/85) g g
Page et O
- e eo
Response
gemediet RAC Comments / Recommendation d.
State Response Action a -ll RAC Ewetuation of State Reepense adequate Action j *g*
=j
'{
(*)
Ces,tet.
8"*d*-
(C) 48 e
1T
- 3 Mg Ej gu quote Incomplete (I)
(I) i g
2,".
g; P.10 Adequate, pcecedures to piece for A
No response necessary, scheduled Itet updates.
(ett mentet-petitles) 1 1
r J
I RAC llEVIEW OF Tite STATE OF IIEW llAferSillRE RADictACICAI. EleERCEleCY RESPolfSE PLAsl Foa SEASROOK (Revision Deted 11/85)
APR 3 0 Wi 3
g i.
Page 1 af E
~
.e a4C C entr/seco--endat ion E
ji me penee e dedial state se.come. Action mAC Evaluation of state a.. pense Ad.ete Action j 'f
=j
".{
(A)
Ceeplete i
4g 3g gg Imede-(C) yg g.
pu g.et.
Incenklete g
- g o
.g (I)
- (I).
1 A.I.a State, Federal, and some of the local A
MIon 1.2.2 ot ti be modifies to reference I
Figure 4.2.f la Rev. 2.
organtrations that are part of the 8
g overall response organtratton are j
identifled in Sections 1.2.2 anel 8.4.2 Including the F R t.N P.
Sectton 1.2.2 should reference Figure I.2-1 i
which lists local organisatlans.
3 A.I.b The operattonal roles of many of the 3
?
New Blampshire primary and support organizartons are generally well k
i described In overview fashi..n in Section 1.2.1.
18owever. In order to ag include the local and Feder.nl organtrations, and the I nt er re l a-tionships between thee.
the cross-Section f.2.4 will be added to the cross reference indet should also list reWence tp S.I-Il for 4.1.b.
l Section
- 1. 2. 6 In which the Il,'
Interrelationships are summartred.
i Although the overstew descript long are generally good, the detalle of sewne of the Interrelationships and the c..ncept j
est operat inns need ta be elatIfled in a nueher of areas. For cuample:
I
?
,I
(.
I RAC REVIEW OF Tilt STATE OF llEW IIA 88PSillRE RADIOLOClCAL EslERCEllCY RESPOIISE PLAll FOR SEAsam APR 3 0195 i
(Revision Deted II/RS) 0, Page 1 ff {gy,._
A
~
e jE teopense Benedial RAC Casusents/Recommendet ion de State Reeponse Action O
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Actica 1*
(A)
Complete Yl j
o{
lande-(C)
- u quote laccept ete ar 4
. E
?.
(1)
(1)I he a
E la mo (1) with regard to clarlfleetion of 1
!A.I.b (t) Based on descript Ions in some of responsibillfles for Host Cbnunani ty.
Cont'd the procedures, it is n.st clear monitoring /decontaminetton activities, j
'{
who ts responathle for and who the State pr@ oses:
provides personnel for monitorind I.
To delete from vol. 4 Department,
j and decontamination (e.g.,
IElCilA of Mmem Services procedures, on
- 9'*
- " *
- 8 ' ' ' * " * * **
'1 procedures
- p.
Il-S*
p.
Il-i; mosttorleg and deconteelmetton, Divlelos of Hassan Services pro-g cedures. p. E-3, p. B-4; Nattonal 2.
To modify Vol. 5 Section 2.7.5 on page 2.7-10 (Rev.ll, to reflect Ceard procedures, p. B-5).
tnat monitoring sad 3
deconteeinetla,
et reception centers ellt be carried out by I
(2) If the state assumes the dettes host cosseug py persovinel u9 der of a municipalit y ( p. t. l-4 ),
hme swervi sion of Diviolog of Public does the state latend to imple-N [dence 8th vol. 4 Dlvles l,
ment this rule? Util the state of Public Haelth Services pro-
' H use its own resources or will it cedures.
4 pendin F and met l
Caseugity procedures for Decom-commandeer local factittles.and t s=Instion/Monitori ng.
A resources?
3.
To modify Vol.l. Sec+1on 1.3.3.
I Divislog of Pubt lC Health ServlCes (3)
P.
l.1-8 DritS. 2nd para.. Bast retoonsibilities, on page 6.3-80
'*g,,',,,,
'NC***,a,,,$*
sentence - If DPHS lat>.r at or i e s la Concord are responsible for elli e.
carried out by host comunny persomnol.
analyses of samples, does this mean the DrilS lahs will enordin-4, g
,,r,
,p.eggge o,co,.
- 8aetlog monitoring proce@res ate the response of other support
Y 8'****
laboratarles that might he f
k u
a 9
t 3
t 0
est e
1 iee l) dil) pt t
et p1m(
e mcm( o aAo c
s C
n 1
I ec ee a
et r
nn ee ee)dt) pgA eet a
.e( mo(
.d ig eA m
esn 0
ep 3
ee B
M e
)
ts eW fo no i
tev les E
CAs E00e c sA c }qgu y
' E i S
- g e gpg l
l s m r e eaF a
ndeSty
.l dedh oe l 4tfdd o9hHcrPo dh nt th lg a l l n.,o s
s e
l W A )5 i o1 st e
conn E
0 wi1 c, ic Pel aa ietPaoA r at lai t il s
s3 e ptMt w
wn L
l t
(
- 3. w O e
P n r v
(f g
c) a m aRn ong e
e orFo ti np r:
e ndn Ssl gCo C
I
/
tu2us sc St t
sI e
laEi
- 5. h Fc o r I t e
oe eo
- 3. rtoeE l
e n
b h
2 I s
- 4. p F s!
a s
s 3
t s I,t etdirl.
9 o ner Oe w
e t
ee w ili n eI s w o nlyed s d s
Sioru e
1 ly og n u tea d] e el ol hnl Eo e e
ei se hs ol qN l
e
.llbvs lg u
t ot le.
ia N
nwi no t
ta Tst hac wrp lto ntde p
i e ct nel a
p o
n P tc c
o i i )s E a o r r A E t
a t
te o V st d
Slv f
c d gi y
i o eeA T
D c
S e r t
o e n H
t 7.h r M e
nnfic R
A rr Hp n c c
e.
ooA adPit S
SF l ai R
S-y c
c i. t P tp(irw eOc e 4. t n
A s oo e
h t
b
.t t
o S )s t Ye e
-~
A s
oe ivt S
d se e4i nfPn I,f y
tN a
H r
s a
t d
ir ep pr6 oay I,1 e
e ic s s a
e M he eimi s
c otS To e n
ef el n lbS I,l
.wyF t
d R
o o( a et a
t -
,,rhr i
o r
e s e
l a sb fn O w (e r $ 5. resspto Iocm ae V
bti
. pan F
e p
u m
t u
p u e g
ee t
.i dt s ro.
s s n l o h
l.l d
u i m P
n eH a
t n c lo o es r P 2 o ii s
e eilolic t
ob lad eC e
i a
brr hr s
Vl c Vi a oesso Ve o p
e a W
R sl cet p( nItt eib stt p b
ct E
(i e t
io aacl a y
tco yll ei e
f I
e d
w*h o s y n o id c rribl f weaC f r rv ye f o r ni e a 3.t S o o v a E
a o.etel ie i
I erp icS V A r
cHbbrtl dneme d s H +e i t
n s pt hvp l
t d 3. e P a e e s l C
as t
d sncop d
ba poh o eP m c R
t ti r ac n ni oeoera o
ut o e ol M r c t pC A1SOlisEa a
oC t MdOia S
e I
.tud m
C CA 0 eo e e
iisb Sl 8
ie A 0 p c le vp u
oet 1
o.rh oa ie 1.
0 CbPT gI Dc 2
3 4
AR 9
)
2 3(
(
I E e1T34 qw*3g2 n
o
.i ta dnemmoce R
/s t
m oC C
AS b.
I.
A al ii 1
l
.d
n
.II~}a b~i,;
a t
23 j,{3-I 3-
- 5_ I
=
=
t to 3
og e
,b, Y
o I
O W~
5s d
gg u.12.t a.3 J.
..a p i..r.44 s.
ll5 5kI535*!!51ggj:g2g2;g g;iI-3; EE bi -)s.i~
!}s'sE8 l jg!!!I'f i}'.~isi)*
g=l=,
h 2 *e'
. eI g
g g
5 )!j!si}s,id!!!, It**f 2,j
!!s. u,s 'I 1 "e :
ig i
!!5 i
.I 8
El 4 )i d,;J. -:i 8
>l,5 gru, 8-iv j
.x e!Eggi.teilgig.ri.eb1.!.alIgg;g i
.5, a
[
o so a ;.
8 a-
-8 ua
-3 3
gg 3
-s rhsi:
y ls e
gg r.
a n i........,
m...
.E G
1 1
32 1
5
\\
~
=
o 1 0
- S 3 2-
'a lit =!:-
t 33.
[I *
.T3330
~'
23 il C3 L
F) 3 3
=
1 3
I E
W~
5 5
Wg uo petdins ;o g en eseg pene[ead la m
b b 2
7 [] *;Si t t f 2 2. -
- " 9 I S E ] ' _.?
I,5 -
- R2 8
= 2 d.
3 t g
1.l gh
- t
~$W 1
g 2 &
S g ;5
- 2 A
g"l, a
e 3 33 g
_;,a si
,! $.82,.3".,g 42- " 182, E *E Ei j
{
g N 3
<m a 2;o 2
u ft t
- g. a-Ca 3
n W l.!
~
$'* h*
I
- EE
-f.b.227_)8;; 23
-j E' i 2,2
[
t i.
,2 se a v.i it.:1.I2E. ti. gi
'3 f }8
=58 2
h g.
- ~. s es,y l.Eg g B oy =. t. E. 7y.
- n.3 8 j:z.
4.s W-E7 g:
5 5?l
- EI E Cb 1
a a
~
y m
b 2
(t) owat***ur (v) esenberv g
e 1
1 34 3
1 s
~.
.I*
RAC EEVIEW OF Tiet STATE OF BIEW IIAlePSIllRE 400 3 0 g RADIOlACICAL EIEESCEleCY RESP 0eISE PLAll FOR SEABROOK (Revision Dated !!/85)
Page i of ino a
I oc go Acepense Gemediet RAc Csementeltecommendation 5.
State Response Action RAC Evaluation of State Beepense Adequate Actles -
g, (A) complete gg 33 3;
(c)..
- 3 3g gg Imede,
Na
.me=e ineso.ie=e (1) 1 (31 g
3=
n 8
l' O.l.b.
used? (See also p. 2.5-16).
The ont'd DPHS facilities may be inadequate to analyze all samples on a timely schedule. Interaction and coordination with FRMAP should be described.
(4)
- p. 1.4-1. Sec. 1.4.2
-- The t4l Volume I,
Sections 1.4.2 and 1.4.3 Federal response plan is the Fsgure. f.2-1 and 8.4-8 will be revised to reflect FRERP bened om 31/8/85 FRERP of which FRMAP as only the Federal Register.
Sections 1.4.4 end portion dealing with radiological I.4.6 elle be reve ed to reflect monitoring and assessment.
Interection betweem New Hsupshire and Nontechnical support is really FRERP related. (See also Sections 1.4.4 and 1.4.6). (This is not to imply that all elements of the FRERP need to be included in the State plan).
(5) p. 2.4-1 -- The federal response tu Section 2.4.2 and Figure 2.4-1 eles be revised to add FRERP f acllities (FRMAC.
facilities should at least be FRC, JtC).
mentioned a.n the plan to provide a general awareness of FRC, FRMAP, JIC, etc., and their functions.
e f.
l RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF 88EW HAMPSHIRE
-l RADIOLOCICAl. EMERCENCY RESPOffSE Pt.AN FOR SEARROOK (Revision Dated 11/85)
I APR 3 01989 e. n.I '.am.
-O RAC Comments /Recommendetion d.
State Response Action jo jE gesponse tenedi'al O
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action U.[.
jj o
I.*
(A)
Complete Au[
h i=*-
(C) h quate Incomplete III II 4 474 (6) Section 2.5 The interaction l,
e h *V) with FRMAP and NRC should be (6) Specific revisions are descrfbed on p.
described.
44 of 109:
e i.
l 6 A. A c The Interrelattonships between the A
No response required.
various state, Federal, regional, aml local organtrations involved in the l
overall emergency response organiza-tion are illustrated as organlaation.01 charts on Figures 1.2-1 ( p. I.2-M) and 1.4-1 (p. I.4-2).
e
. A.AJ The IdenttIicatton of speciiIc A
Individuals by title within each of 1
the state response agencies who.ere In 6
charge of the emergency response is provided in Section 3.1.3.
The Covernor has ultimate command a n.I control of all state resources, even i
though a significant amount of this authority has been delegated to the
?
NHCDA. Ilowever, the line of succession of sucession =HI added to Mion if the Covernor is not available is still unclear la the plan.
'l l
=
a 9
s a
t e
e it 0
e l) 1 pt d.6l)pem(
te mem( o
.ao c
a c n g
I eg
. e a
. t ee s,() d. t )
P A n w(
t
.. d I
aA m
e
=
e.
0 3
e.a M
ta t
s re
.e i
tse n.e E
C Aa E00A t S 2 O*. ( u
.j 10?,h A
t E
II s IsP R O
IIA F t
r ot wmetO r2 ey a
y ro rt ye oF i rF o sr l
orl erSet oefl l I g toaroHh s f
ig 9t v r
t seoI s
no IA )5 empa s
ot n
snatPt e dnAR a
a smp W L so cO u
s A oiTF c
n e
q T msH t
i4 e
p E
0 i
s ue st sr d
P w
3.e i eH M
/
Rrs o
d soss sI eo sthr
- e. rR:a o e t
r At i
A rb E
lo 1
sicf r
u op.
v il a
- 5. A d1O e
A d y Cf oee d
h tt -
F 1
lo u
5 d
r T eCc yO O1 2
q e
Ct v m
ta%
t wS.ilN r
so i a E 0e n
HrraI cOnefEte 1 d f
t=in 1
r u
t oou oE i s
b n h n
w o r
e nef PthtC r gt e e d
.a e
f o o
n T
t s
s h
o d o,(atcO ee e i qt nz u e
P r
A s
t t
i d
e HiEih p.
p PCm ce Idyg 632 dtot c
E i s nuaE ic n
T e
c tctt oi a Sk mdrec o
lL c1ei R
A e
e r
S ccnnt or cr d.
d eA ee r eh Pr c m p e
Ee Ai n r r
(
Aoe V
u S
mmdo ht O l otl oe A v I
d a o t
E C.
lc Oseeolt oe e
t ce o s a I
i t ue k
I I r
ouCn T o t
f TI e i
I,FI ei a iwd on) n srtCl y 4 : e t
g Hb to o n a Oet O 0o n E
suc b
R a i
o t
l F
tosn t i F Ce p
t c :i F
a s ti Fied s
t s q l.
nel.t e c :e Oe.
n lot e - FI r,e ad G(
ee
%2 I
d I eeer a e e
_O t nd s
cd
(
en h
r a
i e n E m co rnmo r n3.
is WlE(
a io s
V h
m Vr
.d c h et e
up uieo ue5t o 4 n t t c yt yds yd m r C yd l r E
i yc re t sb l c aP se idt dor 1 dot qH Id o o I.
ttt c ot yt e e b. o f ee
- eri f
I.
f i icr ceuS R
v cv p
t e feso ce em A ein V A a
r tl E
epn euI dre)Mk s n p
S t
df keearqI oitbR aso ou oro oreeP sorb u
C e
paA s Cc ic eaeat hiieI MDi(FmeC M o 8 pc MpdrD e
t s
rmstvDre t
AA f
Rt le 0
e D
S l.
2 3
4 5
6 I
p AR
)
6
(
O.je4*
f..jej i
t.
a.
o.
moc.s/.
t..
neac c
A e
U'*
i I
,l j!
qi
e I
RAC REVIEW (F THE STATE OF BIEW IIAlepStilRE RADIOt.0CICAL EMERCEleCY RESPOIISE plast FOR SEARROOK APR30 M (Revision Dated 11/85)
Page 5 of 09
,e RAC Comments / Recommendation jE
Response
- gemedial, State Response Action O
RAC Evolustion et State Response Ade, mete Action
- g 4
8 7,
- o,g ga
[
In de-(A) icomplete 2,
g
.r, o (Cli E
3:
,,ete race.,g et e mo (r>
j (l.
.Nf4
- p. l.)-l indicates that each agency in A
1 i
the emergency response organtaatton l
has been assigned the respens t hiI It y
'l l l
8 1
of assuring that pe rsemnel can be g
notified and nahtItred arummt-the-clock.
I (j,'
We suggest that reference alce he ma.Ic At page 3.5-4 reference will also em made to
II to sectton 2.2.3 (pp. 2.2-4 to 2.2-11y section 2.2.3 t24w combilitys.
' le whIcis deseribes the 24-hour notIfIca-l l
tion capabilities.
A2A The agenctee and Individuals respon-A Add to Appendia A. DPHS Procedures, e comme 96 alble for major elements of the New chart for tPMS energeacy organizatlan.
Blampshi re emerstency response are spectfled in Section 1.1.1.
I 8
The detatis of some of the inter-4 relationships and the concept of 8
operations need clartiteation in n number of areas, as descrlhed in the enaments for element A.I.b.
I I
J t
APR 3 0 gum
.l RAC REVIEW OF TIIE STATE OF IIEW IIADIpsillRE RADl01.0CICAI. EIIERCEIICY RESPOIISE Pt.All FOR SEARIIGOK j
(Revision Dated 11/85)
Page L et Jgg, n
e Benedilal j'E Reepense RAC Ceement e/Recommendar ien State Respeese Action RAC Evaluation of State Response Adesgaste Att len,
h%
ej i *.
(A)
Complete 2g "h 4 or leede-(C) l quete feeemPIete 3"
I" (I)
(l) a he rho 1.get. Is for m ste. s schorit, +o 4
A 24 The legal basis of the State's A?
- " **rgency functicas are Incleded In
. R$4 007 The statute is cited on p.
1.3-0.
authefttf to asetene the emergency
- The appropriate portions of the RSA ellt be fonctions of a municipality is ont
- cited, clearly set forth.
Otheretse the f%sessant to New % shire RSA 907-8:6 and legal basis of eac h State agracy's 137:6 m Gowrnor has m av N rity to octiens Ie cited I= Table t.I-I.
'" " "efensa*' dnc"y **sa**d ***'#*'
C ClvlO D Age d to esswoo dlrect operoflonal Control over the Ci vi l Defense
'""C' 8 ""' " ""' "
- I' #*
The legal bests far emetripal the occurrence of a disaster beyond local government's emergency response control. CIvII Defense functions are defined y
planning and actions is provided by es N "yeoeretton for end carrylag out of e
eII ennegency functions..." RSA 137:2 1.
E RSA 107:10 and to described to p*
"Olsester beyond local control
- encommesses 3.3 4 both ne+vrel and ese-eede emerJoacles. 907:9.
The Governor Is f urther empowered to declare A.J Copies of written agreements referring I
e Ste+e of Civil Defease meergency, and, in
'l occardance olth said declaretion. to take to the concept of operations Jewetope.t segos to promote end secure the safety sad bet ween the various orgamlaattons la protection of nee Magshire citizens.
. l support of the emergency response were 8
not availabia for review dering this plan restew.
shts element will remata inadegoate until restew of the written asreementa has been campIeted.
OnIy A re,g ed sad edated ilst of agreements elII
{
an indes listing of the agrecernes 3, be incorporeted in geene 5 of Rev. 2 to the presented in Sectlen 4.t.
9 L*
-a
I I
s RAc REVIEW OF TIIE STATE OF IIEW IIA 88PsIItRE
~
aaotot.octcAI. Entecenc? arsponse rt.A8 rom staan0os j
l (sevi i osted intes) aPR30 W 3
r. n.I a -
~
I
~
ji n..,
a diet nac c e.i.Inece-e.dat i E
st.t. ne.,s.
acti aAc r testi
.I stat. ne.p
%e t.
,acti 3;
U (a) c pt.t.'
g _g j;?,
O[
I 4.-
(c).
?
.o g
t.
'tocametete g "*
(1)
(t)
I~
a I
_g A3 The forthe tan re.te of the wettte.
t
{l I/c.e-j ogreeeret. should tactede adJresstag
.iI gk the fettevlag issues:
8.
(t) Nave att bus and ambulance r l, s,
e.d e,e.s ence comosa, agreements compe.tes entered late agrececats
=115 he lac l***8 la Wole=* 5.
for.eawIres?
I21 se<DA does not eatIcIpate seekys agreaments for reception centers 4
mess care f ocIIItlos.
Itist Comavalty (2) are letters of agreement avatt-piens reflect evellability of reception s
able for each of the potenttal f acIllties; the State elli rely upon Red g
hs W mass en f acilW WW%
j receptten and mass care but It does not proose forcing them to fac1Iitles?
seen agreemnats beyond tw Dev i
5 o) Wi.a t fe*,.i cor, c
,r e..
.c,,,
,,o.,., o o,g
,)
c.urrently have with mass,m,e acillH.es.
f
, to. 8.tt m-
,a
,,e e.d.
,.,,, me Et.mpplies to a timely fashten?
esilingness and capability to heedle see,.
1.1-3 sec. 2. r. i. iast
- -a,c;'
- ,2;,",,,4",ed7l,de:7,r' tsne.
Such arrangements must be de B.
8.
.r t.
. I steply YI.'
essere avaltability of Et te Cl*P agencies t f.
P 2.
to be ef f ect twe.
beem reelsed accordingly la Rev. g.
(4) Istters of agreement de ant (48 essene 5 ellt be edetod alta Rev. 2 to appear to have hece epdat ed (e.g.,
t.aadamer EIle badgn, or a
Tt.De?)
El I aAC BEVIEW OF TIIE STATE OF IsEM ISAperSelIRE 1
APR30 i
.Aoioim icAi. e r.co.cv cs,0 se ru. ro. ScA ao, (sevision Deted 11/83)
(
Page L of g.
g E
j:
di.i
.e RAC Comte /Geceameadation d.
State Seepense Action
}
aAC Evaluation of State Beepeace Adcte Action
- g eq (A)
Co w lete Igl gg gg Imede-(C) g; gu quote Inceept to
[
]c 3
(I)
(I) e l
I s
(3) ht are the arrangements for y,7,, "
9,,,,
'd-4 desteetry for emergency workers?
evellentepere,r.o. o,so o,seetrys.ctio.ll t stocks, dos a
be i
2.1.2 added.
ellt be amended to describe locations
.M The ability to staf f at t fonet tons at t
, rom ensen the state disburse so,y all facitttleg and locations on a 24 dos lW.
A IIsting o
meIIeble dosInstry Is attacted.
hour bests is not clear to the plan y'
and procedores.
g With the excepttee of setCDA, rester
- Rosters allt h added to oech egency tedicating a capability set 24-heer erocedure In Volume 4 Positions entch I
potent.o 2-ste,, ",e s.co.'4 sni,t....e g
staffing were not asaltable.
The IIIICDA roster was seconsistent as w ed, section 1.3 els e to added to the compared with the listinst an p.
I of cross-re'***ac*-
ti.e,r-edure..
The restere should tactede locattoes, meseber of Indteldeals required and the names of people who wt!! comprise the second shtit.
r Section t.1.3 should be added to the cross-reference Indes for etceent A. 4 g
.' I i
I
e RAC REvlEW OF TIIE STATE OF IEEW IRAfIFSIIIRE 3
I RADIOt.0CICAL DIEACEleCY RESPOIISE Ft.ARI FOR SEASROOK Apg30 W Fase L es,IJE, taeoision noted ist:53 i
jE toepense Amendibt,
SAC coments/seceamendation 5.
State aesponse Action O
BAC Evenuaties of State toepease Adegasta Aetiein I ".
(A) complete
-I d" u(
(cl 1 -
seede-i I4 geste Ikemptiste R
3-j,,,
(g) 4 (gg se eo o
4 Thte eteemet is inadequare because I
the felleertag Stees require clart-8 '
ficatten (t) Sectise 5.4.4 should spectly wtus (13 section 1.4.4 =til be== ended to note fI (by title) in Drits will reque.t that EOC mf 4 et si request the required Federal assistance.
l (2) Secties I.3.3
( p. - B. 3-B B ) and (2) Page 3,3 11 uIll be revised to be
' i Secties 1.4.4 should be revised coaststent esth sectra 1.4.4 g
se tinet the sections will agree se edio trHS will contact for g
Federal techetcal assistance.
=
s (3) Sectice 1.4.2-the refereace to (3) The Fst'eP citetton eilt be revised to e
F W la section 1.4-2 e
t i
FWBAF sineute he changed to FRESP.
(4) Who mettites the FAA and at what (4) Motificetton of FAA will be added to clasettteatten leset?
(see p.
T, ele 2.s-1 and to the NHCDA AgenCF 2.5-4. Table 2.5-1).
j (S) The after-hours comanunications (53 The description of after-hours e fice% f & In w on 2.2.7 link to FDeA may be through the
=t:1 be revised as suggested by FEMR.
EICC to Washi nton, D.C.,
or through FDtA at the DIF. or the e
L
APR3019ss
-l RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF BIEW NA80PS8tlRE RADIOLOCICAL EMERCEIICY RESPOIISE Pt.AN FOR SEARROOK I ;.
s (Revision Dated 11/85) j Page g of* m RAC Comment s/Reco==endet ion E.
j:i R..,
Remedi I State Re pense Action RaC Evat. tion et state R..p adg t.
C ion Act 3
3 u
(.)
.te 1,r
- 5 In.de-(C) w u
quote Incomplete E
I-2 (I)
(!
mo
't
- C. L a (FOIA) Regional Director at the s (gd FRC.
but it is 3 through 8
Colorado Springs. Colorado (see
- p. 2.2-11. Sec. 2.2.7).
C.A b Descripttons of the spec 4Itc Fede r.e l I
resources espected and the arrtwal ttoes of these reso.orces are not well I
developed and should be presented in j
more detall. Assistence will pr..h hly be required fue both technical and nontechnical support in adJttion to that IIsted in Sec. l.4.5.
(
g
{
Section 5.4.5 of the plan specifles the Federal assistance that may he B
needed (pp.
l.4-1 to I.4-4) f r..e the l
U.S.
Coast Ceard and the FAA for restrteting access to the EFZ area by j,
1 boats and planes. and assistance free
- appropriate Federal agencies" for
/
monitoring shettiish contantnatton.
I However, with the escept ian of the f
U.S.
Coast Ceard representattwes wbe e
report to the State EOC and IFts/t.0F at 8
i
'/
/
a s
v
/
I.
n J-
Apg30 W RAC REVIElf 0F TIIE STATE OF IIEM llAlersillRE RADIOLOCICAL EMERCEIICY RESPOIISE PLAll FOR SEARR00E (Revision Dated 11/85)
Fage 1 of, 3 e
~
jE
Response
Benediet RAC Ceemente/ Recommendation State Response Action O
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adesgaste Action u
(A)
C pi.te (C)
.d Incompllete
?
ll
- Inade-i "br guate L
(I)
(1)i I2 l
- m. o Arrival times for Federal resources cited in g
5 action B.4.3 wlIl be deteregned tw yg
.Cl4 Site Area Energency (see Table 2.4-4; i ( l, co,n,t,ac, ting as,sC. fem. a,nd DOE,.e,,, sed to
,s. ect t a,S,ec,ti.on 1.4.2 p
- 2. A-m. no detsii..ere eud in r.
m.
Section I.A.S or other sections of the will reflect the potential lateraction with g
d # "*"
'9**'#*
- ' Sections **"."4 plan se to when the other Federal In 1.4 and 1.4.5 Ch anges ellt resources are espected to arrtve.
ref lect the descriptive notorial contained In the FEEP and Indicate that MA elll g[;*
coordinate Incorporation of non-technical In addittoe the state's interaction Federal response acts.ities and 4HOPHS.III
- I i,
with DOE FRBIAP. FEMA and the NRC coordinate technical Federal response g
ll "Cd ''-
should be described (see Sec. 2.5).
Section 2.5.3.d.
will be revised to reflect ramen*.
The NHtPHS IFO Accident Assessor Also, p. 2.F-3. Sec. 2.7.3 states that
,,ec sure.ssi be revised to ref lect l
late sc+1on eith ronenp.
r additional K1 supplies can be obtained l
from the Federal government.
Such Section 2.7.3 has been revised (Rev. 1) to arrangemente emot be made in advance reflect the f act that the state no longer to ensure availabilit y.
reg res e Fedi res resources for Kl.
n
.Ch Generally adesluate.
Presently in the A
No response required.
l I plan.
the resources avallpble to empport the Federal response are 3
descetbed in Section 1.4.8 ( p.
1.4-A).
Resources include f a.ct lla tes
.l (State EOC and EOF), air annt ground l'l transportation, and food and todging.
Details on local airports 7;
and capabilities are presented on 4
l1 RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE APR 3 0 m-RADIOLOCICAL EMERCENCY RESPONSE Pt.AN FOR SEARItWE (Revision Deted 11/85)
Page E of
,09 t
samedilal ji Reepense
~
RAC Comunent s/Recommendet ion State Response Actinn O
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate
. Action 1.'l (4)
Complete
- l
- g saade-(c)I
~
=
h u
q.ete i
ie e 2 w:
l'.
(I)
(I) mo 4
I t cre Table 1.4-8 ( p. 1.4-S).
Reference is l*
(vs also made to Section 2.4 for addt-tional details on the emergency factittles.
e im Cenerally adequate.
Staffing of the A
No response required.
EOF by representatives of the various emergency response organizations is described in Section 2.4.3 (p. 2.4-12) and Table 2.4-4
( p.
2.4-11).
As indicated on Table 2.4-4 the Depart-ment of Pubtle Health will report to the EOF at the Alert EEL.
Accident 6
assessment technical analysis will tw performed for the state at t he 9:UF by the Department of Public Health.
As indicated in the NHCDA Procedures, at the Alert level. the uttttty m.s y dispatch personnel to the EOF. Inst the J
ll EOF may g be operational untiI the Site Area EmerRency level. Therefore, the bulk of the utility's informatina prtur to this will likely come-from the Control Room or TSC.
Furt twr. the l
9
RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE I
RADlot.0CICAI. EpeERCENCY RESPONSE Pl.AN FOR SEARRWK (Revision Dated 11/85)
APR 301986 II Pare y of 109
^
e o
RAC Cosaments/ Recommendation 3.
jE
Response
Remedial!
State Response Action O
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate
, Action i
ej I ".
ea
?g j-
[
Imm-(A)
- llemplete e4 (C) l u
I quote llicomptete a
. C. 24 same attuatten is likely to cutst even j
s (*.M at Site Area Emergency or General
]
Emergency for rapidly moving severe l.
accidents.
l i'
A3 The capability of the DPtiS lahoratory I
I to perform all requireil an,elyses
.n s described. to not sufficient.
The p
capabilities of the DPHS 1.sbora t or ies In Concord for providing radioingical i
.l analyses are described in Section I-2.5.3 (pp. 2.5-16 to 2.5-21).
Pquip-ment available at the UPHS 1.ebora-l tories is listed on Table 2.5-2 (pp.
9 2.5-17 to 2.5-19).
Capabilteles of the facilities for analyses are suene r t red on Table 2.5-3 ( p.
2.5-20).
The plan also states (p. 2.5-16) that the capabilities of the DP;IS laboratories are supplemented by the New England Compact on RadiolnglCAl f.
Health Protection described in
{
Appendia M of the Dl915 procedures.
g Appendia M of the DiilS procedures 1
- l p
l t
- l
1 I
\\
l n
RAC REVIEW OF Tile STATE OF llEW HAMPSNIRE RADIOLOCICAL EMERCENCY RESP 0stSE Pl.Aal FOR SEARROOK (Revision Dated 11/85)
APR30 W Page g of.inq
~
e jE RAC Cosament s/Recomumendat ion 5.
State Response Action O
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Actiosi
- g
Response
Remedial f
e, "h i *.
og je tg (4)
Complete Ew Inade-(C)
E I w:
2 geste tacomplete i
.,u mo (1)
(1)
C.3 includes incentories of laboratory r
ent'd equipment available from each of the I
i states who are part of the compact.
However, the plan does not Indicate gi, whether New flampshire anticipates that sne r..ronse for 4.l.b 3.
these supplementary resources will be j
required, or whether the D111S labora-g tories and personnel will be self-suffletent in a radiological emergency g
situation.
This should be clartfled since it appears that the DPIIS facill-ties will be inadequate to analyre all samples on a timely schedule.
Spc-l cific outside laimratory capahi l i t y (New Englaced compact
- lahs, for example) and turn-around times for analyseg should he evaluated in l
advance. The enordination of response of other laboratories shoulJ he described as well av interact ion with FitMAP.
I 11 also appears that the DPIIS l a bo r.e-gog gy yog.
- l. page 2.5-16 IPHS hnold encuenn i ca t e wit h activities, to ledice+e telephone eslaboratory the ElW/lfl3 c munications and Civil Defogse radio es l
prisery secondary.
l It>di f y Vol. 1 Table 2.2-2 to show Civil l
Do'oese rarflo consnunicot t on eufste between tFO and OPW laboratories.
J
3s RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF 18EW HANP5 HIRE I
f, RADIOI.0CICAI. ENERCENCY RESPOIISE Pl.AN Folt SEABROOK e
(Revision Dated 11/85) gpg30 W 3
Fage E of l509 L,
.) :
RAC Comments / Recommendation j E
Response
Benedi'al.
.U State Response Action RAC Evaluation of State Response Adeq ete Action
.j l *.
(j jg jg Ime-
! ' (C) l :
(A)
Complete g
g; 7u q
t.
- racompt'ete g
g n
(I)
(1) i e.
C. y The Plaa describes the
..eppl ement a l I
resources which are avallahle to the "e
I State of New Hampshire, if needed.
,) l I
I The letters of agreement were not k"*r*
of 89rea m t are being updated fw available for this RAC review.
Rev. 2. as noted earlier.
ll t
The state will rely on the New Engl.end Interstate Compacts now les effect,
,h federal assistance sender the FRERP and
'g]
,2 i
I the state radiattori advisory committee 2.8.5.
The State Radletion Advisory should be referenced in Section 2. 9. 5 CanalHee is established h statute.
I and included in I.et ters of Ar,reement,
o,ither reference la the plan nor Ne letter i
agreement is required.
Volume S. of NH state plan. I.etter of I
.f Agreement with Po rt smout h N.e va l Shipyard and Poage Air Force 8.ase m. eke
'r Letters with the shipyard and the Air Force no mention of emergency angistance Base ellI be updated to note specific
- "*****D'*'#
- " T "***
j availability in the event of an accident at Seabrook.
l
- D. 3 pg, A
No response required.
[(I l
' O 'l A
No response required.
f g ll e
Il 5
4f i
l l
l l
IBAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE RADIOlACICAL EMERCEllCY RESPONSE Pt.AN FOR SEAR 1" APR 30 m (Revision Deted 11/85)
Page IL of' 109 e
j "E
Response
Remedial RAC Coomment s /Recommmendat ion d.
State Response Action
O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action f
(A)
Complete
".h 3
"h 3{
Inade-(C)
.u
. te iece e
a) m I~
mo E.8 flot i f icat ion methods and procedures 3
FAA will be added to the notification IIst on b #*
are described in Section 2.1.2 (pp.
f 2.1-2 to 2.1-7) of the plan.
While Earlier notifications of DRED are reflected I**
2.
2 h W
l"N', d, lj, most organtrations are nottfled in a
, g
.g timely manner relative to coergency Rev. 2 and modified as necessary. Likoulse.
NH[DA notification procedures will be classifications, some escept ions reviewed and updated.
appear to eulst.
For example, the FAA p
is not on the notification list on p.
2.1-6.
In addition, DRED and the Department of Fish and Came are not notified until the Site Area Emergency, even though these agencies are assigned public alerting responst-blittles (IIHCDA procedures, App.
F, conalder precautionary beach evacua-tions at the Alert level).
The following items also require (Il Director of Puoll Transportetton Safety clartitestion or resolutions has no duties regarding mess care or use of school fecllitles.
Department of Educatloe handles cannonications with
-g (t) In the Director of Pupil Trans-schools.
This is reflected in ne.
portation Safety procedures, it procedures for that egency which will be published in Rev.
2.
N %t. mlgg is not clear who contacts host handle school closure discussions elfh the school administrators.
Red Cross tI schools shout possthte esse of mobilites mass cars facilities, as their f art lit leg for m.sg care or evellable.
Procedures for activating Reception Centers and mass core centers Pe are outilned in the host Communf ty
.8 plans.
These are being upgraded for Rev. 2.
RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE RADIOLOCICAL FMERCENCY llESPONSE Pt.All FOR SEARROOK (Revision Dated 11/85)
APR3 @
0 e e.i_7. a na J
j}E
Response
Remediel RAC Comts/ Recommendation Oe State Response Action g
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Actlee g
eg
.g (A)
Complete a
E gg g,s 35
=h-(C) g g
pu quote Incometete ye 7*
g%
III IIIl I
.f.I Reception Centers an<l at what 4 N) emergency claestitcation level.
It Who decides if host school are to disetse students?
- Also, the
'g school listing (App. A) should be f,*,,C*N",,'d'ndntcat!s. *[
[N P'
g y
qu prioritised by prosimity to the Is also contacted by the local i
I plant to assure those moet itkely trasspwtaHon coordinators (e.g.
see P.IV-22 of the Seabrook Plan.)
No j ll to be affected first are cost bottleneck is enticipated.
The Pupli promptly nottfled.
A fan-out Transportetlon Safety procedure will be modified to note the redundancy.
- )
call system should he considerc<f a
to speed up contacts with each school.
4 e
(2) It to recommended that the State (23 section 2.1 will be revised to reflect
~
ecHvan n of Dea % t of 4riculture Department of Agriculture be at the ALERT ECL.
Likewise.
the nottfled at the Alert classi-Daoartment of Agriculture procedures and facetion rather tlian the Site WIM nottftcetion procedures etit be revised to be consistent with thfs.
Area Emergency (p.
2.1-6) in
.g order to prepare to resrael In the event of escalation.
j8 EE Procedures for alertins, notifyins and x
mobittring emergency response person-l nel for each agency are available in s} '
the written Procedu rett sectlip of the
't I
t
RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF NEW liAMPSillRE RADIOLOGICAL EMERCENCY RESPollSE Pl.All FOR SEABROOtt (Revision Dated 11/85) 4 a
Page 11 of 109 APR 3 U Buy RAC C
..ts/ Recommendation 5m a-
,e Sf State Response Action goU
Response
Remedial 3lj IS RAC Evaluation of State Respons a
u5 e Adequate
, Action gg E
g;
$k (A)
Ceeplete I "*
ICI IE 7u quote Incessplete a" Y (I}
'E.1 plan. not in Section 2.1.2 as ladt-i (f}
(t,.7d cated in the croes-reference inden.
9 A
,If summary of staffing assignments f.e r each agency and each f acility for the various emergency classiffratleen levels is also presented in Sect leen The cross reference will t>e amended to cite
- 2. 4. 3 ( p. 2.4-12) and Tahic 2.4 '* (p.
2.A-I3).
These should be added to the Section 2.4.3 es well as Section 2.1.2.
cross-reference indca.
In some Instanceg. robilization of emerRency response personnel would be
.I delayed if conducted in accordance The EOC la opened at IMUSUAL EVENT, wi t ti the procedures.
For caample, if little or no potential for delayleg mobillastion
,8l exists here.
The Duty officer promdures response members must awalt the
- lli be modified to expand initial acttvat ton of the EOC, the mobiliza-a 4
we."
tion would be delayed (see NHCDA ac Procedures p.
2-1 and 2-2).
Similar 4h delay for the UPHS laboratory (see
}f!
DPils procedures, Lab Sup. p.
1,).
'l t
%dif y (PHS Laboratory Supervlsor procedure j(
l I to reveerse etaos 2 and 3 to initiate monl-i toring tanm call tg> prior to cpening the I
laboratorie..
s :
k 3
I
..e 8
RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
,I RADl01.0CICAI. EMERCENCY RESP 0llSE Pt.AN FOR SEARROOK APR 301986 ji i
(Revision Deted 11/85)
Pese E of 109 e
jE
Response
.Seen ist RAC Coeusente/Recommendat ion State Response Action O
RAC Evaluation of Statw Response Adequate Action
.j I*
(A)
- Complete l
jg jg I m*-
l (C).
-o mu quote incomplete
$b k%
3 i
l 52 Additional items requiring,clarifica-I (C
tion are:
k 5
(l) (NHCDA procedures Proc.
1.
p.
I-
'8 (I) Two mm4 staf f, total, are required for g
2, step 5)
In the off-duty these duties. CheckIIst itse #5 (p l-2)
=
hours are four NHCl)A stafe will be edited to reaove siibiguity.
They monitor the event by listening to members nottfled (two to monitor incoming connunications.
the event and two to open the EOC) or areTwo notified to open the EOC and monitor the event?
flow do they monit or t he event ?
(2) (NHCDA procedures, Proc. 2. p. 2-(2) The fan-out tree will be Included In Some sort ni call "PD*"d ' " C. oiecklist item #5 (p 2-3) 1 step 5)
=
will be ad t ted to note that CD staff fan-out must he used to notify will be directed to report to duty this many people of the event.
stations.
Nothing in the procedure indl-cates whether the nottfled j
persons are to report somewhere f
or to stand by for further Instructtons.
I i
l
'I l
.l8
)3Q g RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF HEW HAMPSHIRE RAD 104.0CICAR. EMERCEllCY RESPollSE Pl.All FOR SEARROOK (Revision Dated 11/85)
APR 3 01986 Page 20 of 109
^
e j}E Respanse Benediet RAC Evaluation of State Respegee Adequate Actles ^
RAC Commentsleecommendation 5.
State Response Action (A)
Complete 3g eg l
.I (C)Ie gg ag leade,
gente I)cemptete g;
pu (I) 1 (31 3=
gg e
E-Section 2.1.4 will be revised to reflect that E.5 Section 2.1.4 (p. 2.1-7) makes no I
et the ALERT level consideration will be si glen to n H f ylng the kaCh populad on of mention of special consideration, for the' precautionary actions. Pre-recorded messages suimmer beach population or public notif-ellt be broadenst over strens in the beach ication at the alert level if conditions areas.
These messages will be included In the NHQ)A procedures appendlu that contains indicate the need. The State EBS l
P ans the EBS messages. Appropriate revisions will need to be modified with regards to the ogso be made to EBS eessage texts.
use of WOKQ. Action by FCC, the State.
I Emergency Consuunications Coordinator The New Mpeshire EBS Plan for the Seacoast OperaHonal Area is curmnHy being mvi sed.
(ECC), and CD and FEMA is required.
Appropriate sections of this plan will be i ncorporated in the NmEfP, Vo l.
I, Section Coordination with Massachusetts and 2.1.5.
timing of appropriate information The State EBS Plan will reflect the use of a
releases appears weak-wTsN as the AM cPC$l and woKg as the rm cPCs i stations for the Seacoast operational area.
f.S The subject of notifying and instruct-1 ccmunications with Massachusetts are ing the public has many areas in the
'" ( e. g.,' ' **6 plan which require. clarification and In supporting procedures a better integretton of emergency Director Procedures).
The cross reference response planning. The following are will be updated to note the various places where thi s to rdination is Indicated.
The specific examples:
NHCDA procedures will also be amended to provide for delaying the automatic (1) The initial public alert is notification should this be advisable.
primarily by sirens and tone-Iso see me nse to
.6 H.
alert radios. The plan indicate' s I
w
!l,ik 1 l RAC REVIEW OF Tilt STATE OF NEW HAMPsillRE I.
APR 3 01986 l
RADIOLOGICAL EMERCENCY RESPONSE Pt.AN FOR SEABROOK i
(nevision Deted 11/s5)
Pese 21)of d.
d.1 a
~
jn me pense
- m. medial mAC comments /an emendation State a. ponse Action mAC Evaluation of State Response Adesteete Act ik -
(A)
Comptbte l
jef j{
Inade-i.1 (C)*l.il.
~
,.et.
- 2 j
(I)
(I). g 4m o
y g.
ll-e!-
(l) The DRED procedure does address notif5-d4 that the audible alert system may cation Ip. 2 Item #m Appendix A).
A (c e f be supplemented by other nott-
- ntences about clearing DRED facilities will be added to the fications for remotely located procedures. NHQ)A will also add a voice i*
Persons ( p.
2.5-10).
It refers activation description for verning beech population. Fish & Game has no specific f
to supplemental nottitcation by notification responsibility. They eight g
- i the Division of Boating Safety, be used to find campers and nunters'71GT were idenHfled as unaccosinted fw la en e
g,
,8 h' l U.S.
Coast Guard
- DRED
- and emergency.
Pubile notification Department of Fish and Came.
elly begins et SITE AREA EPERENCy.
I g
- herefwe, significant delays in However, not all of the proc.
suontemental notification are not likely eduree for these agencies tokto la activated at the ALERT level as g
describe this alerting acttwity a result of Rev. 13.
(see procedures for DRED and l'
f3 NOAA is not nneded for notification of Department of Fish and Came).
In marinnrs.
USCG does this using enre appr priate systems.
NOAA, however. Is l
addition
- supplemental public
. l; avellable as a backup.
No corrective nottfication would be delayed in action appears necessary here.
j, jg a fast moving event if some of l
the agencies were not themselves (2) Means for verl fying stron activetton are i
notified untt!
Site Area faciuded In Vol.
3 of the NHRERP Seabrook Stetton Alert and Nottfleetion Emergency (see E.1 commente).Use ITe si gn weports.
3rren sy sres design of NOAA radio should also be con-proviaes ror overlap of coversgo in most ll 8
le sidered to enhance notification og amas.
M.
3 will be added to the l
g cross reference for this criterion.
f a
Page 2.1-10 vf il be edited to note that I s' (2) Means of verifying siren active-some route alerting by State or local l-tion ceset be found in the plan.
- "'loney workers could be required with j
sme stren system failures.
Stron What supplemental notifa.cetton coverage maps wise be placed in local e
eystem is used where sirens have EOCs to enable compilation of slerting failed
- routes for f ailed strens.
Local procedures will be augmented to provide f or this contingency.
J e
naul0 LOGICAL ENERCENCY RESPONSE pt All FOR. maalt, OF MEW HAMPSHIRE (Reeision Deted ll/as)
SEABROOK
.j, r
APR 30 W f'I t
1 O l" nac coesient./necommendation,.E" g
f
?
i a
1 page 22 of a109 m%
state me.po..e Action jS r
j" j3 i
mAc Eeal ation of state me. pen er 4 1*
ne pense namediet "g *
- {
Ad.g.ete
, acts.n
.e
.E4 (3) In the state police (A)
'c u
communica-
{.;
in.4e Iompl.tg (A
e tions center procedures, Appe (c) nefin queto Inicemptete D,
it is (t) t (5t Appendle D will unclear which Ens
' (I[ g'_
message is to be broadcast
- tnswuctions be revised to t
for pubile wen ovide a rapidiv.scaiating.org.ncy. ce{ ton In 14)
As noted at p 2.l-83 sample sess
- t., g q
lacluded as ages are Appendix B to They are also included as Appendithe *HIERP.
(
(4)
- p. l.3-5 and 6 the NHCDA NHCDA, 3rd task 2).
x G to i
procedures (Vol. 4 Section If NHCDA automat trally Actual content of the mes, sag depend upon the nature end tielag of t fles the nott-e ella incident and upon public at the Site Area immediate he from inforeation avelleblo the or Ceneral that utilny and WHS.
declarations, Emergcitey messages fT Also note what is precauffonary I
told?
the puhlte
$***p'
- Q4 ',7 What would the beach to g, p y
The populations spectitcally be", told?
I*,
ubtlC on the beaches i
save te ellt be told l
require area.
Transients g}
e place of shelter ellt be l
5 I) that g
(5) pp. 2. l. 7 Sect.
directed to the the actiention 2.l.4 --- slow I, Manchestar Reception Centers in s
er Salma f the EBS o,ncl oso in Revmessage. Revised versions j
g of system audible alert packeges e(Il be coordinated with the I
[,, '
. 2.
lease of ESS messages?
} m Means re-for strens coordinating activation and EBS are of e
I.
NKX)A (6)
P.
Operations contained in the I-li 2.1-9, 4th line from bottom -.
(Vol. 4. Section 2 p 4-31 Officer procedures Itow many tone alert 4 prm leately I
[
receivers are in use?
The ellt be placed in specialalert rece{ vers the homes of number was heareng-lepairedfacIllfles and deleted in the revision.
tone"*e*lert "* red 4 os I
- C"C**
- persons, ih*
- f allt be the flee the radios are provIded at distributed.
\\_
~
l
[
{
e
RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE RADIOLOGICAL EMERCENCY RESPOllSE Pl.AN FOR SEARROOK (Itevision Deted !!/85) 0m
~)
Page 21 el g
~
o jE g
Response
Gemedial RAC Coesnents/Recommendet ion State Response Action O
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adesluate Action E
o "o i*
(A)
Complete g
j ?
U{
Inede-(C)
,4
..o timate
' Incomplete
- 3 Iw
?.
(t)
(I) mo i
t
- E* #
(i)
P. 2.1-II, Sect. 2.5.5 --- Is the III "** O* '*IN*I *CN'*" * *'
system is a s6ren tone.
The system is
,M Initial pubitc alert an audthle activated by Rock 9nghen County l
Ud*P 'gT,8 d,*h Pin lnt message on the stren system? Who prepares and actually broadcasts audible alert is a tone rather then a for both these I
the message?
message.
- w. Procedures ii
- b. a nd.d to m.e ois cre'.'4.s (8) App. D. - Farms should be listed (8) waps posted in the IFO show f orms. by ll by, prontatty and direction from town.
This Informstlon is more useful I
than tabular lists by direction and the plant to enable priority distance. No action appears necessary.
notification of f acilities likely to be af fected most and cirtlegt l'
by plant releases.
ja (9) (NHCDA Procedures):
Proc.
1 (9) N6A will review the procedures of
- SAE, p.
3-4, Step 2 --- If t he those who participate in EBS message g
g Operations Officer begins puhlte eglietton and amend h es,snecessary (i.e.,
NH(DA and Governor Office alert and notification at thin procedures).
Note that there la no point, tehere is the coordination dialogue with Massachusetts before activating the audible alert system et
- 1 with Mass.
and with EBS the SITE AREA EMERGENCY level.
It is
[
discussed?
How does NHCDA get done automaticely and Massachusetts wlll be informed of activation times.
The
(
the
. ight. message alred in a r
N G A proced e will be modified to make timely manner relative to the it clear that Massachusetts and Maine stren soundings?
"lil be given acH vation times in advance.
9
RAC REVIEW OF Tile STATE OF 10EW ltAMPSetIRE
(
RADIOLOCICAl. EMERCElfCY RESPOIISE Pt.All FOR SEARR00E s
l (Revision Deted 11/85)
APR 30 rgg3 L
i i; g rese 24..f4 loe
-O RAC Comment e/Recommendet ion O,
Stste Response Action EE o
- Ef O
Respenee Remedial O
"g jj RAC Evalustion of Stste Response o
IS Adequate Actlen 84)
Ceeplete
,4
"{
In.de-(C)
- Incem$llete N ~E a
u I
quote 6o (I)
I E.s
,-(Il I
(leMCDA reocedores) proc.
A, f
- (C./J)
SAE, p.
4-),
Step 1. a -- Ilow is 4i l
l the public alerting system
{
l l
activation coordinated with Mass., particularly when the EOCs I
are not yet staffed?
l 8
1 (IRICDA Procedures):
Proc.
4, SAF., p. 4-4, Step 6 --- Coordina-tion with Mass.
regarding ERS needs to be done before stren and j
I ERS activation (Step 3),
3 I 'j g
I
' i after.
I l 0 'l (feeCDA Procedures):
Proc.
15 Who assembles the ERS messages?
f I This procedure would indicate l
that the ERS message comes from the Covernor's Media Listson at j'
the EOC, however, ll$
no procedure wee found relative to this from I
the Covernor's Office.
l?
I l*
l ( ',;
.'t g
.p?.
..,I l P
t.
.l M f 1.
J f-
RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE APR 30 m RADIOLOGICAL EMERCENCY RESPONSE PLAN FOR SEABR00=
(Revision Dated 11/85)
Page y of 109 o
Response
Remedial RAC Csaments/ Recommendation State Response Action O
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action aj "m{
(A)
Cowlete l
Inade-(C) gg yg g;
pu quote incomplete (I)
(1) as gg
. ?e f.8 (10) Appendices to letCDA Procedures --
ge,gg It is not clear g to supposed to implement the various appen-dices to the procedures.
Fur example. App. C according to Pr.-
cedure 8 should be implemented by
[
the Communications Of ficer.
Yet several steps of App. C (e.g.,
Step 9, p.
C-3 says to " Direct 6
EOC Communications Officer tu inttiste broadcast of emergency message...")
Indicates that someone else may be implementing this.
Other appendices have e*
stellar steps without clearly
(
defined implementors.
7, (11) App. C to letCDA Procedures -- Are see 39 etrene to be activated with each new ESS message (Section D).
How often are EBS messages repeated and at what time intervals?
e 9
2 RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF IIEW HAMPSHIRE RADIOLOCICAL EMERCENCY RESPONSE PLAff FOR SEARROOK (Revision Dated 11/85) page E of 109
=
n e
E
Response
Remedial j 'O RAC Caseents/ Recommendation b.
State Response Action RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action 1 *,
(A)
Complete i
-I Og 3*
quote Incompl et e inede-(C) a 2
(t)
(t)
N*
- a..
o E.g (12) (Director of pupt1 Transportation see E.1 l
c Safety procedures) - Who con-f tacts host schools about use of F
their factittaes? Who decides if (b
host schools are to be dismissed?
School listing (App. A) should be prioritized by proximity to the plant.
E.7 Prescripted ERRS messages for the I
vertous emergency classification levels for the Seabrook Station and for various protective actions are proviped in Appendla R (pp. B-l to
._ g 3-13) llouever, consideration needs to be given to the fo!!owing items:
(f) 4 message for this situation will be (1) As indicated in an earlier review added to Appendlw B.
- comment, the messages should include specific information for evacuees to go to the reception centers for monitoring in tie case of a contaminating accident.
e h
APR3o RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF BIEW HAMPSHIRE l'
RADIOLOCICAL EMERCENCY RESPOIISE pt.481 FOR SEABROOK (Revision'Deted 11/85) pase 2L of 109 i
~
J E"
ji n..p a
diet aAC C - t./s.c endation Stat a..p
.. Action mAC Evaluation of State me.p...e Ad.qu.t.
Acts
- "l jg j[
In.d.-
(C)
.j 7, *
(A) c ptet.
,g gi pu qu t.
Ince.pi e.
y n
(1)
(t)
. E.7 (2) The ERBS messages focused on the (2) These messages will be added to Appeadf x i[
beach populations which are 8*
y provided in App. F to the MECDA D'
proc.dures should be added to the pre-formatted ERBS messages in Appendia 3.
(3) ERSS messages for the transient (3) EBS sessages afil be prepared in French I
and beach populations should be and added to Appendix 8.
prepared and broadcast in French as well as Engitsh.
ll (4) (IAICDA procedure 4) -- What (4) See E.6 #3.
mecheatee is used to alert the public in a fast moving scenario erhen time le not available for the co rdination provided by this procedure, and, in fact, when actions may be required before the EOC and EOF /IPO can be activated?
What message (s) is usedt (See App. C also.)
R AC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE RADIOLOCICAl. EMERCENCY RESPONSE Pl.AN FOR SEABROOK APR 30192 (Revision Dated !!/85)
Page 28 of 109 3
j f.
Respons.
menedial RAC Comments / Recommendation Oe State Response Action O
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action I
ej I*
(A)
Complete l
jg yy Inade-(C) g g;
,u quate Incomplete ya gg (I)
(1)
'KF ($) IntCDA Procedure 1.5)
-- Who y
assembles the EROS messages? This a,
procedure implies that the M C
message comes from the Covernor's 8,
Media Liaison at the EoC; however, ' no procedure was found re,lattwe to this frue the Governor's office.
(6) (State Police Communications (6) See E.6 #3.
Center Procedures) - How is the correct ERBS messate selecteJf Eg.
r - nications
!!nks between the A
No response required l
various emergency response organtra-tions are described in Section 2.2.1 (pp. 2.2-4 to 2.2-11), and are illu-strated on Figure 2.2-1 ( p.
2.2-5).
Each of the communication links can be used for notification on a 24-hour per day beats for purposes of activating the emergency response organizations.
RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE RADIO 1.0CICA1. EMERCENCY RESPONSE pt.AN FOR SEARROOE APR 30 m 4
(Revision Deted 11/85)
Page 1 of m
~
e U
j$
Responsa Remedial RAC Casusents/ Recommendation 5e State Response Action O
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Actiem
?
ej l *.
(A)
Ceeplete j-Eu{
t:
e4 Imede-(C) l j*
quate incent ete l
- i. g (I)
. (I)
- , f.
The primary and backup communicat fons A
No response required 0
systems between the various emessency response fact!!stee are shown on Table 2.2-2 (p. 2.2-12).
These include com-municettoes between state EOC. local EOCs. and other emergency facilities.
Communicatione between New Hampshire and contiguces states (Massachusettu and Maine) are descri bed in Section 2.2.6 ( p.
2.2-13) as by the Nuclear Alert Systee (NAS) for communications with Massachusette, and NAWAS for communications with Maine.
/* /.
The descriptions of communications A
No response required C
!!aks between New Hampshire and Federal agencies to presented in Sectica 2.2.7 (pp. 2.2-13 and 2.2-
}
14).
As noted in the plan, direct communicatione between the Neu Maepshire DPHS and DDE or EPA can be done by coseercial telephone.
l I
4 RAC REVIEN OF TNE STATE OF 10EW llA80PSHIRE APR 301986 RADIOUEICAI. EstERCENCY RE M NSE Pt.AN N SEARROOK (Revision Deted II/RS)
Page y es g a
e aU jE
,a Beopense Remediet RAC Cmmments/ Recommendation Oe State Response Action O
RAC Evaluation of 1 tate Response Adequate Action p
ej i*
(A)
Ceeptete l'
jg j{
inede-(C) gi 7u quote Incomplete s
(I)
(I) ya g
F r.4 Communicatione capabilities between A
the vertous emergency response facill-ties are adequately described in Sections 2.2.2 through 2.2.5 (pp. 2.2-I to 2.2-12).
The primary communica-tion system between Seabrook Station and the ROF to the Nuclear Alert Systes (ISAS) (see p. 2.2-1).
Communt-cations between the field monitoring teams and the state EOC or the IF0/ EOF wit! be by mobile high-and low-band Cist! Defense Radio (p. 2.2-11).
Com-munication capaht!!ttee between the other emergency response facitteles are ouemettaed on Table 2.2-2 (p. 2.2-Sections 2.2.2. 2.2.3 and 2.2.4 wl11 be added 82).
Sectione 2.2.2. 2.2.3. and 2.2.4 to the cross reference, should ateo be Itated in the cross-reference indes.
jr. g.e Provietone for sterting emergency A
peroomaet in each response organt-sation are described in Section 2.2.3 and in the Procedures section of the I
plan.
Section 2.2.3 describes the commeneteettons !!nks for notifying e
e'
1PR 30 m RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF BIEW llA80PSdlRE RADIOLOGICAL EMERCEIICV RES?00lSE PLAll FOR SEARROOE (Revision Dated 11/R5)
Page 1 of 109
~
e b"
j$
Response
Remediat State Response Action O
RAC Evaluation of, State Response Adesimete Co ion RAC Ceemente/ Recommendation Act u
(A)
.t.
ah
"{
7 Inade-(C)
"h4
.* u quate lacamplete j*
jg k
(I)
(1)
F8*
each orgentsation, but the provisione de*# W for motifying personnel within each orgentsation to provided in the Procedures for each organization.
Staffing assignmente for each emergency clasolfication level are shoun en Table 2.4-4 (p. 2.4-13).
The vol. 4 is t be added to the cross reference.
Frecedures section should be added to 4
the crose-reference indes.
7 F. 2 accordins to the Plan ( p.
2.2-14), a A
No response required
- unifore, state-wide, four-channel emergency medical communication system Inas now been installed in the Seabrook EPZ.
(Fixed and mobile radios
'~
g throughout the state are expected to have a common frequency in the near future.)
r.h The testing of emergency communica-A tiene equipment to summarized in Sectione 2.2.9 ( p.
2.2-85) and 3.l.2
~
( p.
- 3. 5 -l ).
Table 3.I-1 ( p.
3.1-2) 4 speciften the frequency of communica-tions drille for each of the major
+
d
i 4
i BAC REVIEW OF TIIE STATE OF IIEW IIAserSelltE RADI0tACICAL EISSCDICY RESPOIIBE PLAII Fet SEAst00E OM (aevisi.a noted !!/85)
Page u of naa e
i SeepASee Mal aac co-sents/secommendation 3m St c. a sp
- s. Acts. -
mAC Eval..ti of Stat. a.s m Aa asasse 1-a" U
(a) enesteen
-3 tende-e tc) 1 lsl a_j (m"g E
T,"Iff'
. s_
The stren systen testing program consists ge slient tests", conducted every two F.3 communications links. However, since of:
- 1) a 2) t s", m ted que 1 Cont'd) most of the co - nications equipment
",j'j3 e,
.,n eo,,d is used on a daily basis, in effect annually es part of the formal exerc ises or as seperate tests.
Procedures have been there is more frequent testing.
d m loped fr um tesHag pyee, and are a
Although the referenced sec.tions ad-presented in Appendix E of the Seabrook equately describe the testang of stetton Pubile Alert and Notificeflon System I
co - nications systems between the Design Report, May 1986.
emergency response organizations, the in New Hampsh ire the tone-elert redlo testing of the siren / tone-alert receivers will be tested once every day, by radio /EBS commuunications systems having the EBS network's equipment progrensmod to send a deity test signal to the should also be summarized. At the receivers. The utility will contact holders time of this review, the final alert of tone-stert radios annually to survey the e
and notification system design was not operational status of the
- radios, D"
avai.lable, nor was the system ins.tal-and Notification System Design Report, May e
latton complete. It will be revaewed 1986.)
at a later date.
This Information will be added to e new section in NPERP Vol.
I, Section 2.1.6, C.1 The proposed public information I
Testing of PubIrc AI.c+
and settfleetion program for the Seabrook Station is syst.
described in Section 2.3.2. (pp. 2.3-1 i
Consuunlcation links between NHCDA and CPC to 2.3-10).
The descriptton of the Stettons will be descritW in NMERP Vol. O program and methods of diesemir.ating Section 2.2.3.
Testing of these l ink s will the information are adequate; however, be part of the testing currently described in kcH n 2.2.9 the element cannot be tormally eval-usted until the public information E.*. I. will be provi ded to fem as it is nuptsh 9 e
l t
l' RAC REVIEW OF TieE STATE OF IIEW lea 80PSHIRE RADIOLOGICAL. EMERCEIICY RESPOleSE Pt.Aal FOR SEABROOK (aevision Dated !!/85) 30 N g,
,,e mi m U
jE tespense Benedial RAC Ceuments/Secommendation d.
State Respense Action O
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action
.j 13 j
jg j{
Inade-(c)
(A) complete g
g; gu quote lacomplete ga gg (1)
(1)
(,. /
brochere and other means of dissent-8r..e#Wl mating the information for Seabrook are evallable for review.
Also, en Figures 2.3-2 and -3 ( p. 2. 3-Draft eeergency public Information for the 9), both of these information labels Seebra* Stetton EPZ to presented f a Rev.
I, vol.
I, Appendix L.
New leforeation labels infora the reader to Iiaten to ahe have been developed that direct the redte or TV for emergency instruc-p pulation to listen to specific AM or FM
~ TV stations have been
)
(10ns.
Ilo I
designated as ESS stations.
How will officist instructions be provided to TV staHons elle to odded to the listing of TV networks, if that is what is E88 f*C'8*
totended?
See also Sec.
2.3-2, l,
telephone books and posters (Fig.2.3.
4).
I.
1' g,4 The proposed methods of disseminating I
see o.l.
seergency planning information to the peroament residente and transients within the Seabrook EPZ are adequately described in Sections 2.1. 2 through 2.3.4 (pp.
2.3-1 to 2.3-12).
The methods will include an informational brochure, adhesive labels, information in telephone books, and posters to be I
aipg30 W RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE RADIOLOCICAL EMERCENCY RESPONSE PLAN FOR SEARROOK 8
(Revision Deted 11/B5)
Page 34 et 109 g
e jE
Response
Benedial BAC Ceemments/ Recommendation State Response Action O
RAC Evaluation ofStateResponse Adequate Action
.j i*
(A)
Complete
,I j,
O{
k Inade-(C)
,4 u
quote Incomplete I ~2 2.
(1)
(I) mo 6.2 displayed in public places.
Included
/
[ph/j will be informetion for the mobtIity tapaired.
leowever, thle element must remain incomplete until the materlats specifically designed for the Seabrook EFZ are evallable for inspection and evaluation.
(Also see commente for C.I.)
6.l a.
During an emergency at Seabrook A
a g
j Station, a Media Center will be estab-7A Itohed at the Newington Town Hall in Newington, N.H.
This to the only p
facility from which detailed informa-tion about the emergency will be dio-4 tributed, and where offtelat spokes-persons wt!! interact with the media.
This le adequately described in Section 2.3.5 (pp. 2.3-12 to 2.3-15).
,,U,,, N in the IRICDA procedures (Procedure
{*
8,',,,,
,g g g [#,,,Q, A
g I.5) it should be added that media reflect prear revsee of moose role.
.lth releases should ateo be reviewed with Federes media representetsves that are present at the Medle Center.
Vol.1, Section federal media representatives, if 2.3.6 currently reflects thet Feoeral available.
weepersons well to stat 6aned en the Moose Center.
s
RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF NEW NA81PSHIRE RADIOLACICAL EDIERCENCY BESP000SE Pt.All FOR SEABAOOK 30m (Revision Dated 11/85) l Page 3 of 109 E
Beepense Remedial AAC Ceaments/secommendation 5.
State Beepense Action O
RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action
- j l *.
(A)
Complete i
t" inede-(C) quote Incomplete 9
- 3 Nm L
(I)
(1) e so i
g,y a As indicated in Section 2.3.5 (p. 2.1-A No response required 84), the efficist spokespersons for Isev Nampshire will be the Governor's Pub!!c Information Officer and a letCDA Pubite Informatton officer. They wtII be located at the Media Center in p
Isewington.
(Also see c w nts for C.3.a.)
6%&
As indicated in Section 2. 3.5 (p. 2.1-A No response required 12), news releases proposed by one of the designated spokespersons at the Isedia Center will be restewed with his/her counterparts before release to 4
the media.
This will ensure the 7
timely eacmange of information among g
destgested spokespersons.
s.
G.3/,c Provistoes for rumor control are 1
Rumor control numbers are lacluded in Rev. I described in Sectton 2.3.5.
As et Votume i Appendes K. page K-2.
Indicated on page 2.1-14, two coll-Nc4 Is revle.Ing rumor control procedures.
free 800 ca!!-in numbers will be Vol. 4 6 Procedures IS (Medte Center
~
rewnte 16 m Media Welson), aw estabitehed for Seabrook Station rueur 17 (Rumor Control Steffe allt be revised for control.
These numbers are not yet Rev. 2 to occurately describe rumor control established (see Appendia E,
- p. K-8),
functions, nts will include prwiding I
official Inforeetton to celters ulth specific questions.
j l
i
s' RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF BIEW NAMpSNIRE 30m RADIOLACICAR. EMERCEIICY BESPOIISE pt.AII FOR SEAOR00E (sevision Dated !!/85)
~
page 1 et 109 ejg sospense assedial
~
3AC Ceemente/Receamendation State tempense Action O
RAC Evaluation of !ftste Response u
Adequ, ate C
ica Aet
<A ete eh
- {
Inade-(C)
"h guete Incomplete A n:
(1)
(I) t
- e. o 6.#. c In addition to the rumor control phone
,g numbers, correction of etsinformation will be supplemented by special
.(
briefings, news releases, or use of l
EBS.
Based on the description in section 2.3.5, it appears that the rumor centrol phone numbers will accese prerecorded information on
,a plant status and known rumore.
It Vot. I Section 7.3.5 will be revised for 80ee set appear that there will be
%v. 2 to reflect that rumor control allt eIso inceude procedures for enseerino provisione for callers asking spectfte weetfie cesser questions with cffsciel queettoes about rismors.
This should information.
be provided for in order to expedite appropriate rumor contros and Informetton correctioe of etsinforeetton to the phone numbers atti be included in emergency
' # '" 3"'
pasblic, and to provide of ficials with a more timely input of rumore circu-1ating among the general public. A telepheme play-back system as 4
described will always be *lete* and will not be responsive to Atwe questions.
l 1
RAC REVIEW OF TIIE STATE OF MEW 14AMPSMISE RADIOLOGICAL EsseCEelCY REsrolesE PLAll FOR SEAS 400K i
(aevision noted alls 5)
' s, tQf8$d g Fase 37 et 189 I
i j!
a.e,eese aseedset RAC Comosets/Recsammedation b.
State Response Action O
RAC Evaluation of State Respeese Adequate acties i
u
(.)
.t.
3l
-1
- g tende-act 1
h4 quote Ieeemplete
- u a
g*
pg (I)
(t) 6F Coordiented inforessional programs for g
the media ese provided by the utility and the State of itew Itaapehire (p.
2.3-15).
Onee a year, prior to lI' esercises, o IgeCe4 representative will
-d a*t e press briefing to infore the endia eheet time Rear, emergency g
,j roepamee ergentsattoes, concepts of 1,
operetiene, med heet distrit.stion of I
meus infesuettee wt!! he handled in an emergency.
j i
The sensel endia briefings should also informstron concerning radiation will be tectode Seformation concerning
$[I (ti 23.$'will "9N I
n jy radiattee.
ref lect this.
83 The ples (Sect &ee 2.4.2e PP. 2.4-3 EO A
No reponse regulred.
2.4-2) provides' f or. the establishment I
of the New Maepehire Emergency Operettene Center (EOC) at the latCDA office et State Office Park South, 107 eleseast street Ceecord, u.u.
I i
i i
l RAC REVIEW CF THE STATE OF MEW llA8epSNIRE e-
- APd301985
.Aoiouxacas. smacE=ct REscousE = ra 85^***
(Revision Dated 11/85)
,,,,c lI
,,, g g agg 3-ji mes, sees mesessen RAC Coeumonte/Recommendaties Oe State Seepense Action O
BAC Evaluation of State Response adequate estica g
I*
(A)
Casplete l
j:g u[
t:
Imede-(c)
G I w; g
gg3 ggy
- a. o Revise second peregraph of Section 2.7.5
- g. f Staffing of the emergency response I
(p.
2.7-101 to says local emegeau
[""*,,,*((" drachures"jl perf f ac111ttee se adequately deserthed in dacontamination under DPHS supervision.
Secties 2.4.3 ( p.
2.4-12) and sun-f.
earteed me Table 2.4-4 ( p.
2.4-13).
Table 2.4-4 tilastrates the schedule Provide rosters of local personnel evellable for each agency staffing the factit-to support site specifle decontaminetton e
ties at the various emergency procedures in the host community piens, clase1ficatten levels.
4 Iseesswer there le some question as to Delete reference to monitoring of e
the adequacy of the number of staff whic les et access control points from fI Personnel assigned to monitoring and
~
decastama m ien at E t:e Reception e
j h
Centers /Secentamination Centere*
Append list of decontaminetton I
monitoring equipment to site specific Fc*d"""'"****""""**"
N.7 A haugh the onitoring equipe nt i.
1 l""*"
listed the following coussents should be considered:
~
/
.e e
.d*
I l,
. ?
s 7
e l
- RAc aEVIEW OF THE STATE OF IsElf IIAlePSelleE mADiot.acicas. Essactucv atsrousE el.Am ran sE^=""
APR 301986 (aevlei e noted lltas) page 3,
or lo, sammm'at n
j :i s.,
3 ".
sc.t. a..,
- s. ac i n aAc Ee.s..ei. or stat a..,
as.a se a.es sac cas te/secon=e.dation i "--
(A) es.ptete g '4
.j 1
a.-
.i (c) i 6
- [
g j,
j N
n' o
y g
~
~*
(1) Deconteelnation monitori equipment 8,
is listed at F-7 In the nchester test Plan Decon-tomination Procedures, which also Indicate m swege loceHon.
H.7 (1) Appendix C, p. C Where
- cot'd.
are the kite for use at the The Manchester Host Plan decon procedure Decontamination Centers currently in the OPHS procedures. elli be added to the Host Plen.
(Reception Centers) and Access Control Points? How many Esch additional ht Plan ulfl have el'te a
kits and what instrumente are speelf te personnel monitoring proceduun available there for this added, to include equipment and storage
' C8 " *"**
purpose?
(See also DPHS Proc. HT/DK The DPHS procedures. Vol.
4, AppendlM F COORD. Att. 1).
egli be modified to conteln a generic 8
decontaminetlon
- ocedure, and site specH Ic descript ons of equipment and (2) DPHS Procedures, Monitoring storage locettons.
Team /Decon.
Coord., Att. 1. -
Counting efficiency of CH on Modify page 2.7-80, delete reference to monf Wing at access conW1 poMs.
silver neolite or charcoal cartridge is not 10%; but on the (2) Modlfy Monitoring Team /Deconte-minetion Coordinator procedure to reflect change to Monitoring Team Coord inator responsibillfles only.
Modify EOC RHTA procedure to show responsibilty for coordinet t on of decontamination activities.
Delete p age of Monitoring Teen Coordinator procedures that references counting ef ficiency of 04 Reflect proper counting offIclency In Fleid Monitoring procedure.
9
RAC REVIEW OF TIIE STATE OF IIEW 14AMPSNIBE j
RADIOLOGICAL. E81ESCEIICY
- FSPOIISE Ft.All FOR SEAta00E (Revisio-34 ed !!/85)
Page R of M jE Seeposee Beendial BAC Cemente/ Recommendation d.
State Response Action O
BAC Evaluation of State Response Adegeste Astlee
.g U
(A) complete
"^
"I,
.",5 leade-(c) quote Incamplete E
3" m!.
2.
(1)
(I)
- a. a ge7 erder of 0.5 to 2% because of g eg psastrattee of todine into the certt!4e.
(3) Verifleetion of sensitivity of the (3) DetBS Procedures, Monitoring Team.
E-140/HP-2l0L is covered at step #11 of the Field Monitoring Team procedure
- p. 2. Step 12 - The sensitivity
.hlen refers to Appendl= a of (PHS of the E-140/MP-280L should be procedures.
Appendl=
8. provides verified before its used.
Instructions for wationally checking E-140 using e check source.
//,g g Sectios 2.4.5 ( p.
2.4-19) indicates section 2.4.5 will be revle.ed and revised that att egetpment will be inspected for Rev.
2.
Inspection frequency will be to accordeaco with " applicable tech.
correctly noted.
escal specifications,"
but no reference ese found in the plan as to the f requency of these inspections and the states have no technical spect-f$cettone described. In addition, the egelpeset to est defined or described.
Plae Sectice 2.4.5 indicates that the emergency liste described in Section 2.7 will be inspected annually; how-ever. 18U854-0654, FDtA-rep-l element 5.10 speciftee inspection at least esce every calendar quarter.
6e i
RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF IIEW NAMP5 HIRE m n%Q RADI0tACICAL EMESCENCY RESPONSE PLAN FOR SEARROOK ADD (Revision Dated 11/85) w
..g..., m r;
S se. pense esmediet j 'O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adegiute acties RAC Coments/seconseadation 5e State Sesponse Action I*
(A)
Complete
.k
.%{
l Inade-(C)
"h
,este
- iet.
2.2 2.
(I)
(I)
I E
- a. o M./l Emergency e - =1 cations equipment is A
described to Section 2.2.2 (pp. 2.2-1 to 2.2-4).
Ilonitoring team monitoring and protective equipment is described in Sectice 2.5.3 (pp. 2.5-6 and -7) and in Appeediz C (p. C-13). Dosteetry agatpeset is described in Section Appendix C will be added to the cross
- 2. 7. 2 ( p. 2.7-l).
Appendia C should be added to the cross-reference indes.
N./2 As described to Section 2.5.3 (pp.
A No response required.
2.5-6
-7
-85, and
-86),
field eonitoring activities v111 be co-l ordinated from the IF0/ EOF, The monitoring tease will report monitor-Leg results to the IFO (p. 2.5-7).
d-J.'/
The state's capability, as described, I
is generally adequate. However, there are sees gineations regarding the adequacy of instrumentation and I
eenitoring procedures.
-u
lllllllf(
1
,lI,ljl1(l; lll.
ll; liiJji iI 1'1{
11 1
1 d =. e, nI s
l*
Msi.)(cwt e
a..
a s
0 a i.
1 1!.
r o
e
.. fe
.. e e,s > d.
)
4 2
e.(
1 p
A
..i
. s t
Sa g.e m
..a e
g ta t
S 0
fo 3
no R
i P
t.
A iav E
CAm KOO R
E S EOu{tr.e6 o,.o A
R E
l S
.j laS R
reO t F A
l l f lSl o s yr '
a W A )5 ee eH l twhc L
nP u E P 8 nIf cti d
o di f
I
/
r e
s eHnf 1
i eO E
F 1
eh 5
fOh O1 pA t i
wF 0 d dWd E
E 0e e
t
- o D
P m
nA T
t i
sx c
a R e.
A S eie*
s t
T Ee c
nle" bmIla a Td g
e n
R A
ge f
f S
a npr ch Y
E C.
ip lE oc A
,l HI i e
r ll iwcmfh s
s o
t TI s t
lla eyi
.n E
i n i w '"
F Cv ni i
o eit 0 S e o
l od E
ot I R K
e r
r r g uM c WDE(
a de uns le E
det d i s
.f L
l d s I
eio" el e cl sl e VE A t.
ivR*
oa u r
C Fo R
c r
rcmf o I
s p
oet C
f p s
A&l C
o.
t u s AA s
a e Rt re e T
ier 0
eb u Hedbu r
I t
d Rda d
D s
e irde c '#
A ol v
l c R
rl o
Ooruo Froor ir#
I pf wp A
wP
":;- 3.1aI s d n-l om s R usa i n ort l h i n wen l e Tt d o po a, t F s rs e i s chcA aE e a a er t Dr .f gra t md et a aedl e. SA us e u d em as p Rsca rdd n t arenp e aO ee e noh oA hC eEk scr e f p, t O m c t oe s5 cs E l a nrd -o e1 4i es t yar e pi re all ct s s c h ,l e t f b r h al o nd n s oguyu t cal F ono r npcd oc O cac / oti ne sli eE f sreec t dh l ne t ll t t rr eni h. aob i oh go sgot e w ni e i eP gi rt t e otd : gsea m ial nannm n oieS) uup pu t t us omm He s nl l i now so ) sP e rooep d eh o rrrneD r Cetih d msl c ef ooc ( T Ad t g au l A p fii Rif adn rho a e t vel sfili et cf em! arel enad uv msi h o! nera hot aoo onh s Tc(i stC Tcsrwm Si wa d .ls 7't n z8 1 o l< l ,ll,' l' 1
RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE "$8gy g) ey l1 RADIOLOGICAL EMERCENCY RESP 01tSE Pt.AN FOR SEARROOK (Revision Dated 11/85) IM Page 1 of E
Response
Reendiat RAC Ceemente/ Recommendation Oe State Response Action } RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action (A) Ceeplete jg e, g eg in.de-(C) g 3g gg lg g; gu q.ste incomplete (I) (1) [
- g s n
"'"*d' " " d " ""8 F
- d"'**
Z.7 (1) Detts Procedures. Monitoring to add a statement at step #13. ECL #2, CN
- Team, p.
3, Steps 13 and 14 -
- 3, #4, to indicate that the monitoring
[,7 l'r' ik*to sN N While taking the air sample, the o team should attempt to determine uhether they are actually in the i plume using the fontzation chamber and/or the E-t40. Ii they are in the plume, they must l move out to determine activity on the collected samples. ll (2) DrttS Procedures. Appendia c, p. (2) Modify OPHS Procedures Appendix C, Step 2. Consider use of E-140/HP 210L 2a, to Indiente use of the E-140M21%
- "
- I'*
to do the contamination survey g (Step 2.a.3). J g (3) DritS Procedures. App. C., p. 3-(33 Modiff Vol. t, page 2.5-t6, stap h, under "Ac tivl tles Dfrocted from the Why to it necessary for the ftold Iroa, +o include a statement on the use o' meteriological data coslected by team to measure barometric pres- ''d * "'""9 "**'* sure? Tht e, if necessary, can be measured at the IF0/ EOF. (saro-9 metric pressure does not very j eignificantly over a few miles.) How will thle meteorological data from the field be used? 6 4 I
3- '~ SAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF IsEW 14AssPSHIRE OM RADI0tACICAL EleERCEneCY RESF0005E PIAI FOR SEABROOK (Revision Dated 11/85) Page 44 of toe m a j$ Seepe. Remedied 3}" state s sp
- s. action aAc Evel.. tion of stata a.s, as.gm.se estles sac comments /secommendation s-n w
83 -1 x a.- . (c). R 5 l,,a a, o go.se o (t) (O G I w: &o 3 ,a .s. .se 1.7 (4) Also see cosmeents in instrumenta-Contd) tion for element H.7.) J.f Many of these issues were addressed by [ the State prior to the 2-26-86 exercise but must be documented in the plan. There are many areas of the plan which e are questionalbe, incomplete. or require clarification. These are as follows: t il The T H$ Lob SupervlSor Procedure elll (1) As coted a.n DPHS Procedures (1,ab be sodifled to provide for o cell e Sup. p. 1, steps 2 and 3), during f an-out. the off-duty hours. Superinten-f dent proceeds to the DPHS 1ab before notifying monitoring teen members. This may cause an intolerable delay depending on distance to the Lab. It might be better to initiate a call fan-out, then proceed to the 1.ab so team mesebers can begin travel in at the l eame time. i l (2) The appendices which describes (2) I. ETPAC cperations eenuel will be Incomorsted into DPHS procedures, f PETPAC and DAAADE (a back-up by reference, et Appendla N. l methodology) have not been provided. 2. esch-up dose onessment procedure, including DAAAE6,
- DAAADE, and H-/B-C wilj be included gg the DPHS Procedures, i
[ ---
- ,w RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF IfEW llAMPSHIRE APR30 RADIOLOCICAL EMERCENCY RESPOIISE Pt.Als FOR SEARROOK (Revision Deted !!/RS) 45
.g @ Page i s e jE
Response
Remediel RAC Co m ts/ Recommendation State Response Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Actles (A) Compt e l j:j .u[ e l Imede-(C) li.e t. (I)l 3I f. (I) mo i f.F (3) While in the plan (Sec. 2.5.1) it (c #VJ says that protective action l l recommendations are made at the e IFO, in the DPHS procedures for yl key positions (IFO accident assessor, IFO Coord director, IFO RHTA. EOC RHTA, decontamination g coordinator. EOC accident } assessor, and field monitoring team) there is an Indication that protecttwe act ton recommendattons the director. This should be prepared to respond to any speelficI. } are made at t he EOC, generally by g $_3 's clarifRed in the plan. changes suggested by RAC. pl U (4) Monitoring utthin plume aml collection of air samples should be discretionary depending on the espected dose rates and a need- )I to-know-the-information basis in order to ministre unnecess.ory esposure to the monitoring team personnel. It is suggested that a Ce survey instrument be used t" 2.5.3, sub-paragraph e, to reflect l' that through the plume monitoring to permissable provided that Individual dose consul ttment o do el { not exceed 350dt on monitoring team personnel dostmotors.
RAC REVlfW OF THE STATE OF NEW HAMP5NIRE APR 30 SM: RADIOLOGICAI. ENERCENCY RESPO915E PtJWI FOR SEARROOK (Revisien Deted !!/85) i Page i et 109 j$
Response
Bemediat RAC Comments /Recommendat ion State Response Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Actice ,a 1.* (A) Ceeplete I t* Inade- ' (c) 3 "h .d me.,6.lt e ..ete I.: u) i o) li
- a. o gg determine plume edges and center-gj
!!ne because of its sensitivity l, )l and audible output. ,) (5)
- p. 2.5-8. Sec. 2.5.2 - The m.ejor I f.[
initial accident assessment for i any f ast moving event will likely bl g involve dose projecttons at ]l the time of the accident. Pro-4I tection action recommendations
- g will be based on plant status (inoperability of safety systems.
l loss of att station power. etc.) e and prognoses only with pre-8 determined itkely doseg and not (S) Vol. I Section 2.5.2 will be modif f ed to on projected or measured dose be consistent win mm % % s s, rates / doses. The plans and Appeadtw U (Rev. 11 The latter s W s conH ngenc y. l procedures need to reflect this. (6)
- p. 2.6-25. Block il and Pig. 2.6 (6) F igure 2.6-6 will be modified, as will acewany W test (p. 2.&2H.
6 Plant conditions and 7, prognoses (status of safety systees and features) wtII be the l'I primary consideration for pre-cautionary evacesation. Dose l i I
l l l l l RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF IlEW HAMPSHIRE l RADIOLOGICAL EMERCENCY RESPollSE Pt.AN FOR SEARRODE g APR30 m (Revision Dated !!/RS) Pare 47 e( 109 ~ e jE Easpense temahl'et RAC Comments / Recommendation 35 State Response Action, O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Acties
- g
.j i3 (A) Complete f*- j,e J".u{ t Inade-(c)I lA 4 E geste Incomplet 2i L (I) (I) s
== .i e .T. T projection and EPA PACS are g h C.r*/ of primary consideration. (7) (DPHS Procedures): App. K, Att. f 3, p. 2 - Camma esposure rate i cannot be used to infer inhaled (7) Append lu K elll be changed to delete u l-131 concentrations or thyroid options Sb and 7b for determining I-831 g dose commitment. FDA guidance concentrations. At tachment 5 to I Appendix K will be deleted. Modify e for KI use is at 25 rea NOT 10 Ap pend 1r K at step #8 stating that K1 ~ree to the thyroid. Ingestion will be reconnended to .I emergency workers et a projected thyroid dose of 25 rom. RadIosctive (R) (DPIIS Procedures): App. K, Att. concentrations will be obtelnad from the S - This is M an adequate l C'*** Indicator of todine concentra-tions or dose enemitment and should not be used. (Note: . is identical to l ..) (Also, Attachment l R to identical to Attachment 7.) (s) See g,ggy ' l^ .l (9) (DPMS Procedures): App. Q, Proc. I. A. Table 4 -- Noble gas dose rates as a function of concen-trations are hir.hly dependent on time since reactor shutdown. The I e
RAC REVIEW OF Tilt STATE OF NEW IIAMPSHIRE l RADIOLOCt' CAR. ENERCENCY RESP 000SE Pt.AII FOR SEARRODE 1 3 (Revision Dated 11/85) APR 30 sg ,,,.,,, 3., i i 3 ~:* R.. esmedi.: RAC Ceement s/ Recommendation b. State Response Action RAC Evaluation of State Response Adegiaste . Action 1.'l (A) ' Complete ".h
- g
'g Inede-(C) h4 .u gaaete Iesemplet ,=
- 32 L
(I) (I) mo .g, a-b If same is true, but to a lesset m A fmtnote to the table will state this. 'j (M eatent, of Table 5. radiotodines. g ~I .J.T Capability to measure I a 10 pct /cc A No reg,onse requf red. of todine appears to he minimally ,i acceptable. However, the following commente require consideration (1) (DPIIS Procedures): Monitoring Team /hecen Coord., Att. I ~ ,h Counting efflctency of Of on t stiver zeolite or charcoat cart-ridge is g 10%; but on the 4 order of 0.5 to 21 because of l penettetton of todine into the cartridge. (101 to much too high for cartridges.) Consequently. it is highly desirable to get an expedited laboratory analysis on any sample with statistically signtitcent activity. I l' I.I !
- t "..y....
n -.- - g g:. ~. . nn g g 33 gy_gg_ s .T3310 23
- .c L
3 m C3 7 I x Q. I 3 Iw W 5 5 d gg voysel.oo ;o gm e2 0 Pe18'IO3d E 5 E IshS m-e %w: e I fi U =
==2 t<
- B3
[ sW: zhO e e, 54 u s g W= ~ a 2 (I) esp bopeut cv3 eseberv
- 12325:-i
. a 4 4 Y 2 El
- ir,,
1... E.=, s _o o e. u. 3 4 2. :w= = 2,,3. c 2. = .c o .a e. e-
- o -
. = wq. z.. =o. .a e "3 8.; <tla.* 21t2222: 3" ." = l.
- !. '5
";;t]..4 t 3 . o.. a 4.- 2.t = ~~i28* .."yo-4, 3
- JF - 2.. l. e.e t i l a a. t a
s .o o> a.o t e
- d)
I. "I. $ s=2M O g .yl 3-2:2 5 i f. 8 ". 2 3. t' ,. 3y3 u f, -so e ^ m A et w 3== ts 9590. STEM Jg
Ms n. C. a a s n a i g fe 'l M t. i e -l e @%m e ..O .t m o( xg E eg a P m. .a t g a t S 6 f. j R, i t. g law E CAm K00as
- u=5o,Lo E
A R E g.. m I S HS R P O M F AN N) A W L 3 E 8 P / N 1 E F 1 S OII d E Oe o P T t i S a t A E D c T R A S Y o E C. i HS TIE iC.w p F S O E t e d M s e W E( E ir I u L t q V A a e E C R t r I s C e C s AA n L o R O p I s D er AR o N a }.g.,2m A 1 3. 1,* E P r A o C e f l h a t - t Pi. a i n A rc. h l o C ee) t eo i aS3 .hs e (1 lk l t. hf usBA t of3 f aF 4 f t t A gga1 b N = nnt user iis. oiS e = sk p dhAt e uaS t E t c s P n i r b tHd s Pe es e eeDa or I. sh Cf oe tau st y7 A b t. q u b - Rdderd cn 5 esal e sis d i t2 huuu a d en t Co e w ce. ,b1 c y nnmp l aae r s c l A a l t r, ed nr ps u3 vl oe a r i s euit e esa5 wot p ne hse ohao C Tam 2 HsNc 1 0 I.* 1 1 %84 1 i I illll
RAC REVIEW OF TieE STATE OF teEW IIAlePSallRE APR30g RADIOLOGICAL. DIERCEllCY RESPOtISE PLAal FOR SEARA00K (Revision Deted !!/85) Page 1 of 3 ~e p State Response Action O BAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate acties 3* (a) e...t. AAC Comments /secommendation u tnede-(c) I s- .h n[ quote i - empiet. l h (I) (I) l 2 2" - mo 88 i .Z.// specific teatruesatation to be used by DetBS for the marial monitoring should A procedure for sortel monitorina will be C.pg he specified, as melt as training and devegoped for Rev. 2. It elll provide
- I N listlag*
includlag equipment protective clothing. redundancy. The procedure will be added to vol. I, I the DPHS Field Monitoring Procedure, l, le addittee to the state monitoring iSection 1.3.3 and Section 2.5.3 ellt be t.e.. eure.. (S i.: and i.n. the ';;;'ad,,,;ri,,a:- 2,y 'ag:l:,n,a ' % e g tronoportation for eartel monitoring are bacit y ples seye that upon activetton of the Federal egency or Pei National Guard up. M* % FEBSA. and DOE will capabilities will be used if they are e[ diepesch perseemet to the appropriate promptly eveliable. [, ', amergoecy roepease factittles (Sec. jg 3.4.6e p. l.4-4). J. 2. Coordieettee with the Seabrook site 1 regardlag the evacuattee of on-ette i ee pereepeal to off-site areas le not I {*: discussed ta the ples. Prowlstons for evacuation of onsite personnel ere includnd in Vol. #16, Rev. I, p 88-38. peference to specific provietone for No action required, I the.vecuattee of on-ette personnet could est he located to Section 2.6.5 g1 i of th.. tete,i. A. a.t.d.. ~ .. 1.. ,evie.. ti.e ,i.n smid l l disemos the timing of nonessential f l ir i Ir i \\
l 1 =l l 1 e-mAC aEVIEW 0F THE STATE OF NEW HAdpSHIRE i RAD 104,0CICAL EMERCDICY SESPOl8SE PLAN FOR SEAta00K (nevision noted 11/as)
- p30 g l
.j page 1 of E l i 1 n..,es es edie j= O BAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Acties 4 b5 State Beepense Action (A> compiet SAC Cements /secommendation ey Imede-(c)
- {
-fl j-guate Inceepte ,4 .,u (8) (s) 2.3
- n. o 52 ottitty employee dientenel, evacuation Cast /
- restes, tremoportation, and radio-5;,;,.
l togical esadittees which would af f ect pleet evecesttees. The pise should 4 j' ellecate state er local resources re-getred te direct plant traffit. Benemettee of the plant should be I Setegrated with protective action doctetene for the pub!Lc. g 39 pies deoctlpttene in Section 2.6 are A 40 response required. adegnete. See commente for J.10.e and J.II. protective action docteten 8 f l asking will have to be espedited specifically for the beach popula-l l *g stees. -e
- JRa, The geoemettee reste map on p. 2.6-13 g
the map on p. 2.6-88 (Rev. I
- p. 2.6-12) is
'"'**d*d "D' does est yteelde entitetent detett to Specific routing instructions are located in e Vol. 6. A better map will be provided in a I 3 be useful. map pocket to the plan. Crples of the map 8 will be provided to RAC as they bacame evallable. Other maps are also eyeliable in the energency faclll1les. l I ~1
i i RAC REVIEW 0F TIIE STATE OF BIEW ltAMPSHIRE M 3 C) E.,' RADIOtACICAL EMERCENCY RESPOIISE PLAII FOR SEARROOK (Revision Dated 11/85) Page 53 of JJ l Besponse Samedie .jE State Response Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Acties (A) Complet SAC Consents / Recommendation I3 in.de-(c) (l gi u{ . te i - e. pie (t) (s) N 1 3:
- e. o
= 1 i.i' 3lSe..In addittee, any shelters which may be Public shelters are not proposed by New F Reference to thee elli be deleted . C..f */ weed sheeld slee be identiiled on Hempshire. from the Seabrook Plan. Local personnel may On p. 2.6-8 the availability of S *'
- h*#"'
"' " * " ~ * " ' * """ W j' espe. htransients on an ad hoc bests. This public shelters for transients in prowlston will be retained la the local plans. eutdest recreation areas is refer-i E euM. i i i Beve amarby public butidings been 4 ideettsted and are they well known to local emergency workers? If such but1 dings are eartously considered for 4 j f pub 11e sheltering, the above must be I deas. P e lati m la prowlM by ERFA in tw ETE. 1 86 & In Appeedts E, p. E-8 11ste population by teen, and pp. E-9 and E-te provide The ETE la now included as Vol. 6 of tha ~ N@ERP. Older p pulatl a data in other pepelattee by sector and ring. locations will be deleted or replaced.
- Neuever, espe should also show l
papislattee by evacuation area. I '4 ? m
o m 3 t Icnt e ioa t) dil) pI et pC m( fo mce( a eAe c R C n 1 I eg ee a st P na e e' eu) dt) pqAae1 oe( nu( ed I q RA esnop se R e ta t S f fo ( ,n
- 4 o
i tau lav E CA R KOO RR EO* {u,2a. o E A RI E .j 1ll *. it S S R P O M F AH M) W A. 5 l 8 E P e / t 1 E F 1 S Oet d n E 0e o P i T t S t A E e T D c R A S n E Yo e C s H i T Ns n E o i F C v p em R e s O E e i R t M R W E( is E e I h L t V A a t E C t t R t S a t C n 6 0 A R O io L E I tc e D a e A S R ow
- ,.** I 3,*
O.j *I os eg s en,, ydf f y e. os noo-w e-t e h n nh o) ) b n oot k ct l it e a t t 45 a i r e a t ol i .w l aS d us t aHpd c t i . nip ( rd a n p en e t d e ni m a l. 1 n et s ur e ob ei n ee) n e v f l r g e u vi ce .s ea t n op ou22 a c p i r aS t s s sci e e p r e o t t f r h o. t uD n a a d aj( 1 e u n md e i . a o ot e t t t t spc c c s i a 4 rd t n 0 t p r s h e s d e a e s1 ,t S S ee e1 D s a a i n e ). .t t c n d m n e n e ( R h e og a e c on gt P ( t r n a mt t e C n s8 et ne e d n E t i m uyR p e e nS of h n i l gn e e S a r e o ey n6 .h m js - sd eR n o ,t h ei hf o e r o A t rE .t t t f ioe t t t T b p2 t e c M e et nd a a t e g E h e s. ype neue o o.nd nr t r R n P t r o a e ma vd r .n h np mte / i or e n i s d ee a d oeD p aic e t h n et o ,h v e) o e otah t l . e n t r8 r e l i n ot t i d nd ne e e yd - oh d5 r ct e h a gnia eh st n t n g t
- 6. f a6 A oi v
m h ef d f r mT a n a e t t o i e eC eir D f e2 e n t t f e i e y f l oE2 f t o i b a e C wt n f ot p d S yd .l F.ot e i r b n t o it ep t pi eE i f r C t ee mecn t eet ag e st ce l A o ei c l oet a l t nsSe ,laa nt s r nt e t e n e. R t e eeSS e / e e n 5 pb ( t r t et cn i t l d nse nnt t t ne m raamd eoee d6 o e t e n Ar p el o sor oenscl oon enhS ev en p ac Af t ct aeEFBt a2 ritSLemi g, p j
- l.**
,.8l g, i g 1 . i i' l
- I l
l' l
i RAC REVIEW 0F Tilt STATE OF leEW llAf6PSallRE RADIOLOCICAl. EMERCESICT RESP 0teSE PIAI FOR SEARR ME APR30 W (Revision Deted 11/R5) Page 3 of 109, N e Respense Remedial .jg State Response Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Actice ~ (A) Ceeplete g RAC Ceements/ Recommendation i *. In.de-(C) j ~j "{ quote incompt ete I h,*, () () u E N.:<
- a. o
-T* c procedures. (Also see comments for M eteneet E.6 relative to the statng at which DRED and DFC are mot t fled of an emergency.) JKJpJ The plan deserthes the evacuation and I relocetten of mobility impaired testituttomatised people.
- However, specific plane do not appear to be in place for their relocation.
As described in the plan, evacuation of j those handicapped and having special transportalon needs to a municipality responetbility. The state will pro-vide emergency transportalon resources to those commenttles which have enhaueted their local response capahtlity (Sec. 2.6.5
- p. 2.6-9).
I for rolesslag or moving prisoners However. epecific detalte are lacking. N ovfosons lacet holdlaa ceII..Ill be eswd to tae i For esemple, d et provisions have been procedures for he police chief in each i from .Itn holding feestatsee. ' munterpas, sty made for jett inantest Where are N oviolon for providing redlological sursing home patients taken to from C" the Seabrook/Hampton area? Has the
- 7 C
hs wt l devel ed sheltering effectiveness of the wel(, These will include sheltering factors for the Jell, a MI polley for the jeII, and provistone for relocating prisonore to another locetton. These procedures will be l added to those for the Rockinghen County Sheriff *e Daoartmont, f
- s _
s a, o dia) ncpGs( f a cm e e saao s b c n 1 I es ee e st P na ee n) dt) ei pqaas1 ee( ee( ed l g Sa eesop W se R e t 0 a t 3 S g f o' p t se i ta s i lev E CAR KOO RB E O* { o,* e E A R E .j 13S s ll S iS R F D 08 D el4teo a '* A l " l sa.hsr li c* bl l A )5 lt .af w' lo' lif flE t8 HtZ s "' h "* ei M / it5lo nP e' F c E tce v tee m' a ** F S a r sd o e Ote d e f uaai h Eo e s yo e. D a" h g l' el ct t y n '8 p i Ts t rF an r i8r "' s. lo' e t a sea a 5 A E D c c s mSl es T R A s P ds u o S ha u r ie t do n'P s E Ye e la# nsc C s efot e r R e i c t E T' ogt un e R iI s n e TIE e h.repo h 'C pl s f i h e rv PeHsi t*l u Cv p l o F r 'a e o 0 E 'oc R e f%A es y it tFt n o v* Mi ie f*l R* 18 B d E( s e lE li e e rn li it s h n I L t o$ t ci ca n f E C t a d t F e, f la'"t o* V A a c o adiap f R g p o t* I S f e p n d C d tepdi n*F lu C g uF e "", AA od s S O inl luet i"a L csc tr l r rne e ao t 'C d a"e s M" I eid prnp a c n t n $ e gs D leepensa o'p A e tin l r 4Tc dt s"A S e p A [ heer h$ a ". g,* * - 3 O.I*3 t e nt s . t . sy t - r eS c ar oh# a r 'C a l d sie i c e ot t P ee t e t r gc Sd v0 e st a D ad n e ( eeE p r t eo udip n r w e eot t s l ar s a ool r c od l nt I a c i srl l e a e p e s c s f oE E f d o i vyt e i oi e l ee re. l d ol ce t el l s e h b F Fi nt p d ahh e 0 t e Ef o p e ncst h el 8 at D t A e ei t t e t l /hh AF t m ef rr p t ai 0 t Y B 0 ee a ( m bi eo e wF t 8 h o chf c 1 e e/e c et n x S 1 t t t h0 nt s r e sp e i e E d aI d I t e R e sn e t P a r t t / i uh g e ncE e is t h. ai e e td e t) v n k d ee adr t tl or e-3 eeel sh c o o i ut e e r o t t e ow n t o t ; o 7. c l os s d t f e I u ch se m - t e We t
===2 ad ) a as ar sr en 0 s 2 e f p c at 5 ye C e 1 e e s a y g peit h s m1 cr t c gaee i1 a eCe no cps l e eed e et st d1 t e g* e d ee ed i l pAOshge B l se r 3. n l o ol u t r c t r t e cl o eeg ee se c o ih ee em c 7. h eih hh et mr e( t p Tg A2t R wo Ttl eeP sThi h e c I' I e 6$ t f* f / e. U d-J If* g .0
- 6 r.
0 / s l-l* g" 7 c. Z. I8 Il ,ljl; l .!l< li'
- i!'
Il ll!! i
nac savitu or Tut STATE or HEu saamessetat APR301986 RADIOUICICAL EMESCEleCY RESPOIIst Pt.AII FOR SF.ABRODE (seelei.e noted 11/s5) Fase SL of R asepense assesses e i ~ jO mac testuation of state sospense edegaste Astien E state neepense Actica ~ (A) comptedk 7 li imede-(c) eac ceasestelseceammadecien g "a ej gg quote Resemples gg 7u III III l 3l y; E% l l g 2.". l l J lS.e There te as esation la Section 2.7.3 Rev. I to section 2.7.3 reflects the OPHS J % e poi 6cy on issuing KI to lastitutionet t red as te whether the state plane to issue ' *d ' ' I d"' ' f Cent'd El to teetttettonalised persons. If For Rev,. 2,secti,o,n, 2,.7.3,,elli be rev,t ed to the state's policy to provided l ., et, e e ,ued,, o s and l eieeshere to the ,ta., it sh id he the .tored et heelth care f eellitle. and at .j for referenced to Section 2.7.3. Rockinghes County Jell. DPHs procedures i Kl and the Special Fecility Plans elli be modified to reflect thio pollev. l 2.7-3, reference to made f that a federal agency can provide Section 2.7.3 has been amended for Rev. 8. 5 Aloe, se p. FederoffY New Hemoshire no longer rolles ca Q !g addittee % El empplies. What agency P'*d d*d " '
- g to thtet Such arrangemente must be f
fg ende te advance to ensure the timely i g l evallebility et the KI. ~ J/Af Et util be distributed to state emer-g gency unghere when actual or projected thyread demos encoed 25 ree (Sec. l 2.7.3, p. 2.7-3). The Drus director is reopenetble for authortalag
- g l
emergency merkers to take El (Drits 4 Precedores. App.1). The detatte of l l reopensibtitty for informing workere 8 to take El and assuring that the f proper deee of Et to adetatstered to l' E thereaghly documented in the plan l ll 1 s .si 'er J ' I
RAC REVIEW OF TieE STATE OF IIDI HAMPSHIRE APR 30m I RADIOLOGICAI. EMERCENCY RESPONSE pl.AN FOR SEARROOK (Revision Dated 11/85) p page g of g g. e tespense Benedial jE O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action State gesponse Action 3AC Comments /tecommendation 1 *. (A) Ceeplete Inade-(C)
- -h l{
..a n quote , taceme ece 1; ..o L (t) (1) I an, 3; = mo [ J.Apf (Sece. 2.7.3, 2.7.4 Detts Procedures, c,sp App. E). I Some statemente in Appendia K of the DFIts Procedures require ctar1itea-tion. On p. 2 of Att. 3 the ganea M U, Appeedfu K, sectrom 3 KB gj 8j'y'y*jg' g,*"Y '*,,) C k esposure rate cannot be used to inter ) tahaled 1-131 concentrations or +acturer per individual bottle. I thyroid dose commitment. FDA guidance g for Et use is at 25 ree NOT to ree to criterra, to conform to vne vorai ave s t able per worker. the thyreld. The treatment of this element in the 1 g,fgy The plan regattee further reiEnement. primary mesmo of transportation for l evacuatten will be privately % wned vehicles of the evacuees (see Sec. j p 2.6.5, p. 2.6-9). The plan indicates l that the amattipalttles have capa-bility to provide supplementary g trameportation resources, and that these researces can be enhanced by the state. Iscal requests for state resposee weeld be hamiled by the State
- e a
i
RAC REVIEW 0F TIIE STATE OF isEW IIA 80PSHint AP;; 20g eAMOLOCICAL EMERCDICY RESPOIISE Pt.All FOR SEABA00K (seeieien Dated II/85) es.e.a of m. si Beepense Remedial j 'E State Respomoe Action O RAC Eeslustion of State Response Adequate Action (A) Complete RAC Cnemments/Secommendation I* inade-(C) U{ j er .r.. ..ete inc iete (1) (t) 2 3
- e. o 7 App Treaeportation Coordinator at the c fy state ROC (State Plan, ledCDA proced-
- ures, part 7
Transportation Coordinator). There are meay queettons which need to s be addressed and clartited in the plan. For essepte (1) According to Appendia E of the II) 4 survey has been undertaken to Identify ""'"9 '"d state RERP (see Summary of Key = ambers of the population that are 1985 Population Data, p. E-8), mobsisty smelred, the results of this b* 'o 'd* Y ' hose tha'**nand help to"S*devacuate. "'The survey apprestaately 8659 persons who t permemently reefde in the EPZ do allt be used to refine the lists of thoS* P*',p ie that are cited f r. each h.- not oun automobiles. Other local pIsn. The survey allt etso be the Persone may be temporarily bests for updating the estreates of the numbers of vehicles ses delvers needed. Deeptions of the pleas to pmW the without an automobile because a h feellF member has taken the required assistance mill be reflected in Section Il-G of each local plan and in matemobile to work, or shopping. W tion 2.6.5 of 2 8. I of the m e, f etc. Plans to sostst these persone as we11 as the mobt II y-tapetred indleiduals must be further refined. l I l E N T
RAC EEVIEW OF THE STATE OF HEW HAMPSHIRE RADiot,0CICAL EMERCENCY RESPoteSE Ft.AH FOR SEAB'.00K (Revision Dated 11/85)
- R 3 19BF pag.,AO.,,g, 0
edi.i 3 :: mAc Ev.iustion of si.t. nes,ons. Adequ t. Acts (A) c i.t. 3. stat... Action .Ac c ntoine - ndation Inede-(c) .I
- {
,u.t. i.c
- i..
j .:, o (i) u) a e.
- p..
3 _: =. ,= (2) h.cl uen agreenients with W bus 5 of J (2) Wrtstem agreements utth the bus compenles will be included in Vol. ( hv compentes providing buses and Re v. 2. delvere are required.
- Houever, th.ee esere not available at the ttee of this revleu.
I oess aa+ed published routes for + hose (3) cometderetton should be given to (3) o w% depend upon buses are being i having the buses run designated, pub!!shed routes for those rest-Section Il-G of each local plan util be d ** '' '" Ch*"9' dente and transtents utthout l " d'ch. Larger scate route mes are private tranepurtation. This approa for display at the also betag developed esould ettelnate the need to have ETs aM tw dis kibution to the bus +th.se individuate contact the buey local EOCs to request i { transportation. J there facilities in the EPZ (4) mCD4 to cont acting businesses with 50 (4)lAre eao 8ovaes or more. None of thoseA contacted have long shut-down times. luhtchrequireionsleadtimesfor I copy of the survey report ells be , shut-down (pouer plants, chemical provided to fem with Rev. 2 plants, manufacturero, etc.) and I would therefore tapact the tietng of transportation resources? Mave provisions been made for l 4"
i APR 30 e6 t ,.g sac neviaW or fut stars or ucW unmesulac j0 M I aannotacicas. susacsucy asseouse run rom sensacor (sevistee osted tuss) ,e.e 61 en 1 j
- -lg l
t ne. pee aseeds. 3 ::: mac s iuati.e of st.t. s..,een w asisse .i anc w t.ta.comesed. ties 5. state neeeeees acties (3 ,,,,te, u j 2,i 1ende-(c) -" e;.
- [
quote Resempaa 8l 1 *e (t) (I) .,u L e, o U 3 Th. most
- r. cent i.eters of yu
---t c5 4 will be included as vot. 5 to Rev. 2. list of the bus concentes and pair J AP.p (S) Appendia 1. Of the bus resources (,.p/ Itetado ashot resources would vehicles is attached to the NH3)A EOC Those eggeetly be avellable for Resources Casedinatar Procedures. procedures elli be edited to note which buses are normally used for EPZ I Gestgency esee? What Contractual Letters sdentsfy the number of g% er other erraegements have been schools. vehicl** end drivers that tt.e bus ende to seeere thief What re-cmpanys agree to provide. An agreement g emesses earmelly service those .Ith a f aces Teamsters unson to provide 3 drivers.118 be lacluded in vol. 5 for 'j echesist Rev. 2. NHd>A wiIl prowide f f 6 I documentatlan, with Rev. 2., that bus to include a surplus of 508 of (6) Appeedts J. What resources are e outenlag i t vehicles fr ne g. oveitable from each ambulaece pocolo, and 205 for the schools. servicef are att trained rela- ) Stee to radiological aspects of
- 63 A list of the ambulance companlos ulth The
.hom agreements es t et are etteched. respemeef tNtich aref nunner of vehicles evallable from each comany is Indicated on the attached Training for drivers of buses i summary. l e5 end snbulances is scheduled and ongoing et this time. Training records are IAACB& Procedures. Proc. 7, SAE,
- p. 7.1 - What are the antaca-avattente for revlev, by appointment, at 1
pe<D A. j c poted vehicle seeds for various 1 g' scenarioef Estimates should be gy, seeilable well se advance of an peak poteat t e t demand. This is being 4 determinad through the mail-out survey e A draft sunenery amerseecy so that resources can currently la progress. I be brought forward to staging ""*** # *** be attached, "la final 4 This suninary will areas for prompt diePatch if i form, to the E(X; Resource Coordinator 2. If the peak can necessary. brocedures for Rev. handled, NHQ)A feels that scenarios j
- $*g of less Intense demand need not be f
f .I l postulated and planned for seperatety. ! '. $ l
- f i
RAC REVIEW OF TIIE STATE OF IIEW llAperSillRE RADIOLOGICAL ENERCDeCY BESPOIISE Pt.Aal FOR SEABROOK (Revision Dated 11/05) Page E of 109 e Beepense Remedial j$ ~ state aeopense Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Acties (A) Complete sac Cemeenteleecommendation l *. Inade-() aj g "l I j, Au[ quote f acceptete (I) (3) E. l ** II mo l Z/Op (8) IRICDA Procedures. App. I - What ass are the spectite transportation neede in each community? Are they for running assigned public conveyance routes, taking school children home, evacuating special factittles, etc.? What resources to appendia I has been revised for Rev. 8. have been committed to fulfalt 4 ccoy is ettsched. The eritten y egeen nts eith the bus concentes elli these needs? What vehicles will be included In bl. 5 of Rev. 2. the !!sted compantes make avail-eble for 158 emergency use? Are there contracts or Letters of Agreement to this effect?
- 99) The InformaH on In % ll TransporteHon (9) Director of Pupil Transportation Safety procedures, %pendle S.
Rev. i. Includes eli vehicle resources sad all 1 d wcle E ands U.e.. town by tM F Safety Precedures. Transporta- ) tien avattehtitty sad requite. suonaries). emets should be specitically The addlH onal deteHed Inf ormaH on ,8 sdeettited for each school. Does suggested is included in other eraw ,,e each school % ave assigned buseel (e.g., Appendia i to NHG)4 prorewtweg and in the local Transpor+ et ion j vene and driveret Do the same Coordinator procedwes). Summaries of fu bases make multiple routes, such this Information ellt tie aW to that not att schoots could be % Il Tr ansportet lon Safety Director We M Rev. 2. evacuated slaultaneously with esteting resources? Are Appendta
- 2 multiple routes are required.
J I
a s ..t. w) a i a d i i,' ,3 scn'm( mt r e e e e a. c e n_ i e. e. a .t - e we c .n dt) nm *eI A e< .m ( o F e 0 e 3 t. t R s P r A o i t.e i.s E c.. EDO Ra
- uio,*=o E
A t E 3 s. a. i0 S t 5P R O e .es I
- s. d s
F A ndna W J )s ws.ile sae I i a t t s asi p e Es P eo e i. ty i i v i F En d e t e t e. a. n 5 c c Os a a e d s. b o== re ef Ee e A o t nisi, o e o r i T t d T En c toi cf S er R A sts.ss S
- t Y.
e .r e os E C. ot e ho e s .ar l sTao isi c t i c gn o e fee.t tw Fae e O ori t t .e ce n e WDc o fteI E o o t n e dd I L t. g syr ee o V A a stt E C st R t rict co I s ec C esi en cA m=ss.t ed A o eeea t Bo c c ea r s i D n AR t
- .3r.E.
I _ s.1.*I .) f se od eA nf f kf s ot ooomC soet t e e o i ( o a e i t e d h a t t r h rh i e n a i a nb s r. uc m-n e an upd a o ng t d r e on r? o n t o v ewDp eE t e et eS o A c 3 t i y e t s n t 6 p t t o t p g e e r. e e o ni t t. nA e eh a ese 7 bt cl e t .eP) eh ut c N a o rt t s o cp d. i h es n l( s4 i f a t e e a nyt a e of d nc i c h i c di t n n S c2 t o e o t ri h i f d v as e n e v .ey nt t o ar r c e gi .t r p r. r a p e o ee r s e e s as f d ue reS( a lpe c e i l c md eh 2 s, d t e r o s aeet e eea.,n c at r e t st r v t u e e ed e a eR e4 ao nd t s rdr e at a ch n2 b ege n l s c t e e ee m eicl c e h al eo o t df ht adBs h en e at t m erl e g l a e t e e nl e eem eag )y l eI f l t ya t o hl l ee c t gh al r oh otc: gl c r n o ec i rai g 5t o t esd es e d ea Ae pt s ad t e .S e ore l sh t h eb moean e et e r e e s pd y1 t n ) cec eF l eo 1 csn aaaaeBmtathE A gt ( t i y/ h. Ig .i-n .t l f WM. b ,jlll%% -lf 'I : e i I I [ J l' ,e ..*8.e..,' .- g. - .8I J aj* g: - I.j l. . l g e 2 ,h .,i[' l I! i i'l j :
- l
,i lJ{;;j\\'l],.
l s a e 9 t 0 sst e 1 i ee t,) dit) t esels( fo mss ( e oaa c S c e u-n 6 es se e ee -ee e e. )a n w)t P s, e ( d i g e e ( es t sA 6 0 9 ee 0 s, e 3 es m w e tse d te se i te w e tee t can KDca r s I ':.{o y A at .j 13f.j l s us a rn er t ofnr. ol o-ot ami ineor o s t oo oe ta t e t n rgtns f sntf l el te ic t e a ft s n m s nt e a )5 gr o esno m nse c nlt ne nip uLe esoen s lb o eo a e itloa it t e ca m oe c sP i u pw rh w ioq u l o od dcric a a e i .n o e mr pa n o t t t t nso t d t r a ,p t t N eil n c ee c n c o o. e sdl o e e rt eeo e md s ni tr e e %r ots v t c s s sli s o e o x o v e cs ts t o ce b e t yr / o uhcpi d i a o hadcet 0 a n st i m w is n t h u o tatn c o e el 4 : lail be f e ec e It a t i - o e r e vs h h o h s r ri e h e etrdo
- 7. t i
t t id n t s e c t h t h uoet g V e e prdea us i . o nhf 2 "n e h i t o ta t C e t en i n m e s ief at o c e ss n c t ie tr Tei o bh e et e en yc l c yco yet yct p n dfleebi f et flt ilen f r c e p ot t t g t a a e r te f pe o a e t a n n e et i t av ili idm n df c eEs e gyg st r df n uE( atI rot s R Ds Mrwes M rm eooi soee M n intn r i f lee oeese oeo Iine e e ce e rd t t e aI ot yt iL t cbttla f n iaie io vA e a ddpncd dc oe.. C t dnaoan sed e D c d e f st s aI cml a c cA a l s e i 2 l DAR O e g,4j 5 ."f y e s i w ae deeenoces ts e a. ..ac can fl])I!I!!;.!)' i ; j' <1
RAC EEVIEW 0F Ti4E STATE OF IIEW NAMPSMIRE RADIOLOGICAI. DIESCENCY RESPOIISE FtAf FOR SEABA00K M30FJS (sevision noted IIIs5) Fase.ti d 385 ? Ih Besponse Sommelel j$ State seaponse Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adeaguete Acties (A) c.e,le, aAC Cmmunents/secommendation inade-(C) 1, l j:I u{ .. ate i -em iet. (1) (t) 2 E 3" - me g (2) Deleted from revtem cceanents. J44 (w) ? I: l (3) Appendia 8
- p. B-12.
tion Center to Dover Is located - Is the Reception Center in (D The 9" 'C#
- I Sever at the Dover High School er to it at the Woodoan Park l
School (Table 2.4-3, p. 2.4-( I 7)? 8 - Is the Reception Center in Emehua at the Elm Street at the pubite works f acility. 2 Junter Nigh School or at the I Fehlic Works Factitty (Table 2.4-1, p. 2.4-7)f The uwt gye is the Recentlan contar in - h uses the Ulm Cye in Durham Desa. This vecitity was been l e t-I (Table 2.4-8)* tehtch to not tied by wc4 as a backup recaption All evacuaes directed to Durhae center. tecluded in this ESS message? *'"'C'V" Note: This Receptton Center t,e,,,,edr vis,, Page B*l2,el,ll be,r,ev,i ewed,,,and 1s not included on the map. ,, corr,c Fig. 2.6-8
- p. 2.6-11.
the Durhee Reception Center will be l$ included on Figure 2.6-1 for Rev. 2. 1 e
E RAC REVIEW OF TRIE STATE OF IIEW llAIIPSHIRE mADIOUCICAR. EMERCENCY RESPONSE Pl.Aal Fat SEAna00E (aevielen Deted 11/05)
- [
Page y of 3 e Beepense Gesedia ~ jo i RAC Comments /Becommendation State Resposee Action O BAC Evaluation of State Response Adegnete Action I* (A) %Iet Imede-(c) ~1 u{ Il b ..ete wwe I. (I) (1) y
- E N
.I
- a. o Neo The revi sed ETE is Inc luded as Vo l. 6 of Mr
% v. t. It includes traffic IMJ Although traf fic capacities are gtwen en the table on the last page e,f cescIttes In Section 3. 89 Appeedts I, thle element will not be II evaluated setti tpp final subelaston j 3 v of the Rwacestion Time Estimate. 7,3tj Although the plan describes the State g Polica as respoesible for manning access centrol potete, there are many .} gesettees which reemin and which re-g quire clarificattoa in the plan. For i.t (1) Ils 11sttag of access controt
- CC*, **[" ', 'e,'*I$',g 7 9 l
I pelate could be found in the plae, and no map could be toend app ly to the EPZ not to en Eucluston ('8 ""*' '~2 "9" '4 ' 9 iAich clearly titustrates their lacettees. (Figure 2.6-1 to referenced, but it to not clear lg where the control pointe are.) 1 I.. .} i .!f n
SAC REVIEni 0F Tiet STATE OF IIEnt HAMPSHIRE RADIOLOCICAt. EMERCEllCT RESP 000SE PLAII FOR SEABROOK (Revision Dated 11/85) ** " d 1 2-APR30906 .es - se .e disi -3. State n.e - se Actio. a u C E.aiustion ci State ses,onee ue mate Aus-(A) C ,i.te m e ca enter ec - ndation u inade-(C) -I n{ ..te f- ,iete l h u) u) 2.:
- n. o (2) The Enesuston Area is estabitshed icon IAtj (2)
- p. 1.3-21. Ist State Police. Taag coup let ton of evacuation, not during If DrHS evacuation.
The State fonts that G.r/ 2 and Section 2.6.5 ames issue panees for authortred resetively few pocole will have e need to enter Exclusion Areas and the process pereennel to enter the Esclusion for attowtng this antry nead not be Area, provisions must be made to e=pedited. Deleys for re-enteri ng are acenotable to the State. No changeV have such personnet identified in this process is pionned. odeence and passes already issued la order to avoid having this t. Modify page 2.6-15 Acce** Con +rol, to reflect dif f5FMT Acc. control points and process delayed or preventing bet.enn Euciasion Area Control, prompt response by emergency per-to Modify point 5 on page 2.6-8 7, l sonnel. If such personnet must 2. esselnate the phrase. "Accese first go to the IF0/ EOF. the
- * * ~
- resulting delays could be unac-ceptable.
(See aino p. 2.6-t5 5. Modtfy point 7 on page 2.6-t7 la l th* *8*e fenhlon. Section 2.6.5 Access Control. 2.) (3) p. 2.6-16, tree 7 - tiow manf t3s The number of access control points to the Exetuston Aree depends on the stre Accese Control Fotate will be of the Exclusion Area. A etalous of one used? What to seeCDA,e capability and e ee=leue of three entry points to the Enclusion Area are envisioned. to staff each to do the personnet These points ellt be estabitshed after monitoring for contaetnation? evacuation of the E xclusion Area. What tapact will such monitoring Therefore, sont tori ng resources util not be towed, sad evacuation otti not be have on EFZ evacuation? i= ceded. No plan ch ange appears ancessary.
~ BAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF BIEW IIAMPSHIRE RADIOLOGICAL. EMERCENCY RESPollSE Pt.All FOR SEARROOK APR30m (Revision Deted il/RS) Page { of 109 8 a e ji
Response
seendial RAC Cessneate/ Recommendation State Response Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Acties (A) Complete .j Inede-(C) jg -g[ e3 u queae Incomptete jj [g (I) (I) 7g; (4) If doetastry to to be tesued and let See responses #2 and #3 above. No plan gg logged at each entry point, addt. change Is envisioned. tional doetmetry must be provided and the access /egrese loge modt-fled to be of any value (p. 2.6-16, stee 5; pp. 2.6-19 and -20;
- p. 2.7-3).
(5) (Troop A, tel State Police Pru-I5) N T% 4 pmew 1. m me cedures), App. A,
- p. A-l. Step I control procedure used during Bow does thle step allowing evacuation.
The more stringent acCete control applies af ter evacuation when en access to the EPZ of those Euclusion Aree is established. pereene "with reasonable identi-Procedures for metafelning an excluefon fheExclusion ficatten" fit in with the p.ERP ng sonne and DrtIS Procedures which require Esclueton Area Passes for auch entry? $0.R The State Department of Public Works A Ne plan changes enticipated. and litshways ie prepared to support the removal of 1* Pediments to evacum-tion routes. The department will use its maintenance equipment including plows (esow) and trucks and towing aj l i
RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSillRE APR 30 m RADIOLOCICAL ENERCENCY RESPONSE PLAN FOR SEARROOK (Revision Deted 11/85) Page Q of M E
Response
Remedial gAC Comments / Recommendation State Response Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action .j i* (A) Complete Inade-(C) jg j{ -, u quate Incomplete wyjc [g (I) (3) T>og equipment for this
- purpose, as c,.sy described in Appendia C.
Appendia C indicates that State National Guard equipment will also be available for the clearing impediment s j to evacuation routes. An indication of the stes necessary to activate the National Cuerd should be given here. l The treatment of this element in the l plan would benefit by a more detailed discueston canaidering the substantial coordination effort which would be required in snow removal, maintelning priority roadways, etc. qap This element v111 not be formalty The ETE to lacludes as *)l. 6 of Rev. l. evaluated until the subelttal and review of an evacuation time estimate study. .7Jsse The treatment of this element in the I plan neede to be espanded f ra some
- arese, particularly in regard to l
l
RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE APR30 g RAD 10tACICA1. EMERCENCY RESPOleSE Ft.AN FOR SEARROOK (Revision Dated 11/B5) Fase E of g ~ jE Reeponse Remedial RAC Commente/ Recommendation State Response Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action I* (A) Complete .j Ue Inade-(C) j er .,0 quote Incomplete cr (t) (I) j* [g .Z MP. protecties actione for the transient beach populatione, and the availa-W bility and suitability of shelter for reefdente and transiente. The folloe ing commente need to be considered: (1) There le a lack in the plan of a t I) The olen notes that the shetter-in-place d ' " 'A' "d-
- * " ' ' ' " * * * * '*Cto detatted analyste of the capacity in suitable shelters are directed for sheltering of the summer toeve the EP2.
see vo l. s. section tranatente se an option under 2.6.5. certain circumstances. Stat
- A discussion of the trade-offs of shelter versus evacuation for 1erty, there to a lack of discus-ston of the tradeoffs of shelter-
[u e$od,,,ndividuals s will be ing eersue evacuation for the institutionalised and othere in eletter circumstance. (2) The docteten process te dia-t2e slock 4.Ill be revised ead edited in esv. 2. grasmed in Figure 2.6-6 and dis. cuased in Section 2.6.7 Hou-ever, it te not clear in Block 4 uhen sheltering or evacuation should be used as the "after" protective action numbers. Also in the nest to last tuo sentences p w
RAC REVIEW OF Tile STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE APR30 ;, RAoia ocicAi. En Rce.cv REs,o sE pi.A. rom stARRo= (Revision Dated !!/85) page y of 3 l "E
Response
Remedial e e RAC c-nts/ Recommendation 5. State Response Action "O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action (A) Ceeplete I ". Inade-(c) "h k .I quate incomplete (t) (I)
- m. o I
-IM-in block 4 descript ion on p. 2.6- [ 28 the logic to apparently reversed (possibly a typographic error). If the uhole body PAC escaedence is greater than the thyroid exceedence, wouldn't it The typographical error cited will be corrected. The logic I,s,,mersed. be prudent to act upon the whole body, and vice versat (3) on pigure 2.6-6 (p. 2.6-26) there (3) The special considerstlos given the is no mention of special con-beech popuistion is desertbed in sideration to be given to the 4ppen11w F to tha M4 procedures in 7,,I,9,a , y,I 2 wt I[ beoch populations. The dec1eion Ml, g y * *,*, I
- d making for this special group avscustion of banch areas.
isould Itkely start earlier than for the general populatton. (4)
- p. 2.6 Shelter ef fectiveness (43 it is the State's uMerstanding that this is en instructionet note end that is greatly influenced by type of "O C "*C' action i s suggasted.
release (e.g., are they only moble gases 1) and by time since reactor shutdoun. (Spectrum of gamma softens dramatically as a I function of time f or noble gases; - m
4 RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF IIEW HAMPSif f RE RAD 10LOGICA1. EMERCDICY RESPOttSE PLAN FOR SEABROOK 0m (Revision Deted 11/85) Page 1 of g e
Response
Beendial j ~o l RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Acties b State Response Action u <A) C .te RAC Ceemente/Reccessendation Inade-(C)
- {
.I "I4 .,o Incomplet quote 2 (1) (1)
- a..
8 I o .Isa,
- thereby, greatly increasing shelter protectton.)
up S ten Sb =III be edtted in new. 2 to make (5) p. 2.6-7, bottom, item 5.b -- (S) this clear. Turning off heating or air con. ditioning may make ehettering intolerable in severe ueather and sney g be necessary if the equipment rectreulates the air rather than euchanging utth outside air. (6)
- p. 2.6-25, Block #2 and Fig. 2.6-(6) The discussion on
- Block #2' et page 6 - This action step must also 2.6-25 will be edited to reflect include consideration of of f-stte constraints to the protective Figure 2.6-4 will be stellerly modified.
- actions, e.g.,
availability of Reference Appenden F,Appendts Atte-heent c
- shelter, condition of roads.
NHCDA Procedures, and U. IPd consIderetIon troneient popuIation
- ispacte, h "" N,' c"j,C,",,g(*,',1ect etc.
In addition, the Delay Time and Action Time should be readt ty avattable for a settee of scenattos for the decieton makers to use. Protective actione relative to putting slik animals
RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF IIEW NAsersallRE aAplolacIcAL ssesacency atsroesse Pt.Au rom sEABa000C (Revision Dated !!/85)
- M3J$
p,g, ~ e jE Aceposee Remedi a" SAC Cnements/ Recommendation d. State Response Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response M oguete estle g I* (A) Onepte E ee g tende- . (c) ".l. j fr er S agesete h l 2 (t) 1, (I N~ mo se J.10.m on stored feed should also be (ent'd considered during this decision step. If evacuation is ordered, farmers would have to reenter to put animals inside unless consider-ed before evacuation. e (73 A shelter f actors table speelfic to the (7) The plan should be revised t.o Seabrook EPZ will be added to Vol, 9, incorporate a table specifying Sectlon 2.6.5. The owlstIng Shelter sheltering factors that can be used Factors Table allt be egamded and added to Appendia F, MA Procedures, and in determining the appropriate ^ d U DPHS Procedures es protective action recasesendation(s). A D It is recognized that shelterang ? may not be considered by the State 8 to be appropriate for beach pop-ulation. If this is to be the case, the sheltering factor table should document in a footnote, the relevance of sheltering for beach population. I.!! The plan describes the use of the I Department of Public Health Service Laboratories for analyses of animal feed, liquid milk and food and water samples. e f-
RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF HEW HAMPSHIRE g}Q g; ( RADIOLOGICAL EleERCENCY RESPONSE PLAN FOR SEABROOK g -l (Revision Dated 11/05) .Pase E of 11
Response
Remedial .O jE RAC Comments / Recommendation d. State Beeponse Action O RAC Evaluation of State Beepense Adeqinste Accles (A) Complete IJ 1 ede-(c) A ** I 3* quote Ince eplete g N (3) (3) o,,, 3; = mo es [,g g Functions of the State Dept. of Agri-Cast'd culture (304) are addressed. The DOA enspports the Dpits in the collection of agricultural samples and provides the locattees of agricultural facilities. The 904 also provides personnel and l regulatory mechantees to taptement I protective action and will contact agricultural facilities for the 4 reguistian of food handling and b storage. 1 It is suggested that an attachment be 4 incleded that provides for a listing of locattene and phone numbers of ,( agricultural workers who would be avellable to contact agttcultural t fact 11 time (including smalt farmers) and would help in the sampling of soll, wegetation, ellk, and water. I These workers could includet U.S. Department of Agriculture (tiSt>A) per-sonnel. The State DOA should contact lt Mr. Peter M. Thomson, Food and Agri-culture Vice Chairperson of Emergency + g Programs in 9 I W - w
I RAC SEVIEW 0F TIIE STATE OF IIEW IIAldFSillRE RADI0tACICAL EseEactalCY RESP 00lSE Ft.All FOR SEABROOK I / (Revisies Dated !!/05) APR30586 Pase Zi_ ef AR' l 4 l seendia: l 4 neopasse ~ j 'i RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Astles ~ ' O (A) complete State Response Action i* tende-(c) BAC Comeets/Recemosadation I- .j n[ quote leseeples j er Siu (E) (t) I e4 2w
- a. o O
3e. use of USDA J.it blew Bampaintre to request Coet'd workers.' (403) 224-7941 laceflons and phone nuebers of i A listing of It is recommended tha.t the DOA. Emergency agri tcultural workers who would be eyeliable to contact egricultural facilities is 3 Response Procedures include this available et the State D.O.A. offices. A contact. roster of 0.0.A. statf allt be included in D.O.A. procedures, vol. 4. Rev. 2. The plas provides for temporary access f to the plane EFZ for fare owners 4 and/or employees eith investock and ll aseectated fare care duties. I.- I+ Protective actions utthin the Inges-ll
- Eles EFE are discussed. These actions state that lists of factittles are givee te Appeedia D.
Ho$wver. no rawnrele'l liste are provided for fruit and Appendtv 0 will be reviewed. or for any commer-fruit and vegetable growers and dairy processing plants will be added. I weastable arouere cial detry eseration in Appendis D. 1s addittee, agricultural factitties The agricultural facilities are already einsund he identified relative to dl n new $ $ 8,*"ddist E e,b yg. 8f,' distance and direction f rom the plant j se that settftcations can easily be plant appears necessary. i prierttised to the event of an accident. Page 2.6-22 states that espe fet recording ingestion pathway
anc savisu or tua stars or usu mantsulas RADIOuCICAE. EMESCENCY RESMSE PuM M SEA"" APR 301986 ij. (Revielen Dated 11/85) .ej Pete E *E, ~ u = Bespeeen tonedi a 3 O jo BAC assensta/ Recommendation 5. State Seepease Action O RAC Evaluation of State tempense adequeta Astie I." (A) Com.Le . "I n[ Imede-(c) l h ~ ete semes. L (s) (s. 3e* E e=.
- e. o J.11 data are kept at the State and local est d EOCs and at the 1F0/ EOF.
8 f The M message for Evacuation ~ teclades the sheltering of it ves t ocit and patslag them es stored feed and ^^ Y 8EEE8E8 It is suggested that I a h t% h% N Mm
- l thts protective action usually be con-after step #4 Ic) for ECLf3 to requirs eidered for inclusion in the Shelter-in-consideretton for shelteeing livestock and placing h onetred feed and Insulag en 8
Place EBS message to allou more time for EBS eessage to that ef f ect. If appropriate. I this activity and to alleviate stress this eessage would be broadcast after when told to evacuate, declaration of a SITE AREA EERGENCY. I The restrictice of use of pubite surface unser supp!!ee and shalt fishery areas to property noted in the decistas eritoria for recommended 4 gg tagestias pathessy protecstwo actione (Fig. te M e p. 2.6-31). However, in Appeedta De there as ne indication of OPHS is the agency ulth resDonslbillty for
- a===*e perses for responsibility undertaking the decision process for 8
for assertag the saf ety of utt!!sation (",* I"9 P, cg,',', "',,[' 3 "',", e
- C g
g'lg of the seems (shell fisheries) and shell fisharles. The orHs staf f responsible are I cated in the Eoc. ( wm at bbrd o.I 8.: I . !3. t
- s
1 a a t t e l) i p t W m (t p m a o c c n m. I a $g -ht) e $(Aeo3 ) au( t q m ese O e, .e R e ta ts go se i tse leo t cna E00R8A ggu g ER E 3gpg l S l iSs PM 0 t A nt ltfso d e oo er e le c F e s tt b e s e I oclaoih i l eeh h w o t u l l I l i a c A )5 sl ht t fl deowt r f W L 8 ce se e id a al m r if s e cn ms c e e E P t u m o o Gayri. m H / er enak a mt s f t 1 d o s o o E sec vG S o loven e edlis e c t 1 ( a FOt t ei cebed b} nl s d n t s d aio rlp s e r f a Eo e o d n lL wn e e ,l a p u if p i lC ou c i T t i) oh el i As a t fidw d s ,iit loe m Ehhs s pot s s yt E D c a t niowh w et d T B A r id o S oh y n fF t ri eil s n mt E Y e e aiI eof rcl Srt o Hta t e t u( efA C s pr I o.bc i h o Pnw b d I I n e eg e TDe o bnt stri c4 o d h s (Cd e. o i n C o t e e p ioueoi s rrieorc n n., n is F t R e s a e nD y c n la f 0 pel o io f Es e lieh dh o Ha uric lt r i Sf b t st t mioie di ll e M a s ee et W E( t o f f t u m a i v E wgt lt e n gu n. P pacel e r I O perl e e wo R t no, s V A a 8I sih pdediol bp b y enD DPl o 7 a E at sn ys C t ,t o e iobe r a l h
- 6. t R
I s
- 6. r h c
o s e a l s s eh rdi C 2f vgt c t l ht C S naya caat o nt is AA Hr an wi 2n P ai n t o i f e eaor Idc e e f i I B O ns tiil r O eo I iosOh sm ro r yc yt D cthvtht Dadef rdl o .ll rp u eioepp pe ge t A coasrnt n e rtfdp onduf ph ih a erhiaouo h oc S pt f h c nc T t c n e aS o A s Ft a 1g1S. 53T2 n o i ta dnem mocen /s tne mmoc c Aa ,If j1Ii 111l ll1
II RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSNIRE APR 30 806
- i mADioioCiCAa. amence=Cv nesrouse ri.Am e m SsAnno w s
(Revision Dated 11/85) i Page 76 og let e e j ~o
Response
Gemedle! i SAC Commaante/Secommendation d. State Response Action l BAC Evaluation of State Respeese Adequate Acties -' j I* (A) Completi l b., Au{ t tende-(c) quote Iacesples E 3.: L (t) ' (a)
- a. o I
4J.It In addittee to the suggestions in-
- eas'd ciudad la the above comments, the felleertag Stone require attention relative to FDA FACs I
l (1) p. 1.3-9 DFWS, 2nd para. -- (t) In Rev,
- t. FDA PAGs are referenced in be r., ore,c.d at,ag. i.3-, EPA, PAG's w il l DPHs Appendix T.
FDA and I-ProtecttWe actions relattwo to t o the stat. afeed and esoter should be refe* Plan. Appendix T will be modif ied to 8 f renced to the appropriate FDA and show EPA PAG's. g> EPA PACS. 16 (2) pp. 2.6-2 and 2.6-4 Sec. 2.6.3 (2) m =tle nivlev the new FDA final I and 2.6.4 - FDA final guidance guidance. section 2.6.3 and 2.6.4 will else includes Co-134 as nuclide be edited to reflect any changes in the PAGs ( Appendix T includes them). of emacere. ,g e4 (3) The location of ingestion pathuaY (3) Reference to the availabiltty of data mapa should be referenced Ingestion pathway data maps is included i I in the plan. In section 2.6.6 .a ~ td) Fig. 2.6-7 (which is adapted f rom an tPA ' (4) p. 2.6-31, rig. 2.6 These documenti elle be modified to reflect .I decSetes criteria appear to
- ti path eys and total we e e ttment must be considered.
If RAC l {b ignore two aspects of the FDA n,,.pecific g anguage to suggest it =181 PAGo. (t) Regardless of which be used. ll i i
RAC REVIEW 0F THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE gggQ g RADIOLOGICAL EMERCENCY RESPONSE Pt.AN FOR SEARROOK (Revision Dated 11/85) Page FF o(109 m j5
Response
Benedial BAC Comments / Recommendation b5 State Response Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action i *. (A) Ceeplete .h leade-(C) l "h
- au{
quote Incomplete
- 3 E
(I) (I) Em
- a. o
.2 # pathuey( s) is involved it is the [(..g) total intake from all pathways,
- hence, total dose commitment which must be dealt with from all pathways together. (2) The FE state that the dose commitment from a3 nuclides, such as 1-131 In the Ingestion
+ Sr-90 +... pathways must be less than the FAC Preventive or Emergency 1.evels. Therefore, even though the milk concentrations may be less than the PACS, for suasple, action may still be advis-4Wie T to N FWes rovie fw able/ required because the milk + -secuuelos of total do e ca nitment from all ' 99**'.on setnweve. Sections 2.6.8 sad 2.5.2 water + other pathways exceed the " ' *d FAC levels. (See also pp. 2.5-2 y and 2.5-5). J/2. The treatment of this element in the i plan ' requires considerable upgrading since the resources and procedures for the reception centers appear to be l l
RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE RADIOLOGICAL EMERCENCY RESPONSE Pl.All FOR SEARROOK (Revision Deted !!/85) APR30m Page 71 of 109 n e j 'E
Response
Remedial RAC Co m ts/ Recommendation State Response Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Actioe 1.* (A) Complete a l j h
- {
Inede-(C) a4 -,u quete Iacemptete E (I) (1) d Nm
- a. oo
- .#1 inadequate.
The folloutng comments [Gd'/) need to be addressed: (1) See H 4 and J.10.h. Modifications will (1) According to the plan, state be made to host consnuni ty decontent-monitoring teams utit perfura nation monitoring procedures aw monitoring and decontamination at modificetlors will be made to 4pendin F the reception centers or at the accese control points (vehicles only) (Sec. 2.7.4). From a review of the call-up roster of Drits (DPMS Procedures), there are a sintoal number of personnel assigned to decontamination and they could not possiblF staff worker deconteetnation stations and several reception center locations to the entent required by DFWS Procedures (App. F). (2) Staffing at the levet of (2) See I.7 Attach-ent 4 Appendin F is Sa* H 8 %pendlu F of [PHS procedures will siso queettoaable to meet the be modlf fed for 81ev. 2 to reflect decon requirement of monitoring all monitoring staf fing capability. residents. j
RAC REVIEW OF Tile STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE RAD 10tilCICAI. EMERCENCY RESP 0llSE Pl.AN FOR SEARROOK Art 30g (Revision Deted 11/85)~ Page 1 of 109_ - n e E
Response
Remedial j 'O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Actice RAC Comments / Recommendation State Response Action u (A> C .t. gh t{ Inade-(C) e u quate Incomplete cr 4 8. (I) (I) 3
- a. o (3) The staf fing for the other opera-yn g,sg tions at the reception centers (registration, coordination of remote rendezvous, message center, distributton of emergency clothing and materials, informa-tion and recreation, medical services references, congregate care references, traffic and crowd control, reception center management; taken from Div. of Numan Services Procedures, pp. R-I through R-4) may not be able to be carried out by the five people Of Appendlw A of DHS procedures allt be exp anded to show evellability of 100+
!!sted in Appendis A. DHS pro-personnel. It will also be mded to a cedures, unless, as is quite show that personnel from the host ln i host ple possible, arrivals volunteer to not he help. A volunteer desk is always Isae Section 1-G1. A reference to these sections util be added to the cmss l Part of a set-up at a Reception reference. Center. (A) The plan needs to be revised to (41 See
- 3.
Rosters of host comunity indicate an in-depth staffing p*rsonnel .Ill be added. Detailed listing of A5C asslgnments for mass care pattern for all of the reception e cIlleles is not plenned, ha e.er. and congregate care factittles.
RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF llEW HAMPSHIRE RADIOLOCICAL EMERGENCT RESPollSE Pl.All FOR SEARROOK (Revision Dated 11/85) g . e _0.f 10, a i O "E
Response
Besadial A ** RAC Causents/ Recommendation ,5. State Response Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Actice i *. (A) Complete f g f,
- g Inade-(C)
,,,3 me ..u quate Incomplete 3 m; (I) (1) mo
- 7. A (5) The reception center regtetration (5) This is addressed in (PHS Decon M
form lacks o.ae essential supervisor Procedures, Attachment 2, t ingredients an Indication that Re v, 1, it will be further Clarlflod In I the person is not contaminated sad can enter a congregate care fact!!ty. (6) p. 2.4-4 para. e -- Who spe-(6) See H.4 g cifically will monitor and assist
- '
- I' in decontaminating evacuees?
Agencies or organisations spe-cifically involved need to be identified such that adequate training and planning can be done. (7) DrttS Procedures, App. F, p. 6, Step II.R. I.a - It is easier to monitor (and less Itkely to be cross-contaminated) if the person wears the clothing while being monitored. If the person was wearing this clothing outside, this is moet likely to be
4 RAC REVIEW OF Tile STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE APR 30 m RADIOI.0CICAL EMERCENCY RESPONSE Pl.AN FOR SEARROOK (Revision Dated !!/85) Page g of g i 3 ja Re.,on.e R. medial RAC Ceaments/ Recommendation Oe State Response Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action I* (A) Complete I ej Inade-(C) [ jg j{ g ate Inceeplete g; .g u (t) (t) 33 n -Z#1 contaminated. Further Step gfj II.R.I.h (5)(a) states to monitor the individual's feet. If the shoes were removed in above referenced step, then the only likely source of contaminstion is from the Monitoring Center. Step 11 R.3 - It is seldom necessary for a person to disrobe com-plately because of contamination (7) New decontamination monitoring pro-(unless the individuals worked in C#"' C "**' d '" "* Chec"kl i st plant, for esample). Showering tu Decontemination Supervisor in g necessarily the best way to vol. 4, yMS procedures, correct the concerns of this RAC comment. These new deconteeinate. Careful local in Appendix frocedureswillbecontainedyHs procedures in Rev. 2 and will washing can prevent the spread of of conteelnation over the whole also te contained in site specific procedures of the host community plans. gy, 'CC*"" **d ' ' ' " "c*edure s (8' (8) The arrangeesnt of the receptton Manchester site specific pro and centers for monitoring, decon-In the FHS Decontanination Supervisor racedures. taminetton, and walting was not described, nor was the quantitles Rev. 2 util contain comparable disgrams and equipment lists for each f acility. of supplies avstlable, These will be added in each host comunity plan and in Appendlu F to the F HS procedures.
o E t 3 cst e iei i) pC-( dil) t f et o mcm( eAo C R 1 8 i eg ee a st P na ee ou)d
- t. )s pqA a
se( nu( ed iq RA esnop 6 s 8 e 9 R 1 e 0 t a 3 t S R f M o no i tau lav E CA R KOO R R SO* g .o E aj]tn2m A R E I S HS R P O M F A ll t N s A )5 m. W L E 8 / P N / Sn Ho 1 E Pi F 1 S Ot O N n nc d E O o u e P T t i .f S A E ds a t T D c e S A i R t h e s o e lt n Y c C s dtd e e ii i TJ s n t o n i C v p ee F h O e s bh E R e N R f W E( lt E lf a e i I L V t w s A a E C y R t t I S 8i G n CA O u em L p R O t o I Sc DAR O ( n~a"hh:*4 I n .A g-t m y e;- oa e s a nf e ye a pD nt or c eRt t e s r o ol rl t b t p m C id no n r s r n e y t ya eo u H r n f eh o A ek b 0 d f r a cl me H ,N oi d r gt 2 d t i e r e o mait p R e i d p er eD ws r u a s no e n ma0l t r oq v o t l ui eO f e ad r .h o s e i e d p u;A b F S yt nd o n p m a s t t I eo i l e i a s c ef a aA r t l R r i n m h d l om at .t e v e r n sl u el h ee t d sh i e ,e end g e eh t e s i t C ot o n o e s d0 ed r m s h t e gr h D ni c e e0 m ed t m e t t mni t ot o a c r2 i m a ,l i u o r l sa r h t u r i - t r er n e r q c e-a r nP u u0 e a t e d i i e n a o ee e ei o q b e ev ol d d r R H / c pmA s s e n ,l sh ehi p i er .la r t t t t s s o8 aD e o t r et C r t f n e oe a a d e o ob i n P hnH a
- e. t f
t e t t k d t eh e pt oN cb S c r y e n s o e c c i i a s t st e en d t( ob ue a y s d ee eS ed t u n e w o s b nt t C c r ? af i r e e i bl l ) i t r t u u o d c t s0 .i.f a t v eis ur1 yy. p n o o C n e7 ccr e ,d ad w A p r4 rd t di a st nno e r r e u R e e - enanh b ed l r e qnh eeet DS3 pacit a pe m rggc A vi kl er r el D e v ic ) er ed t e e rl C woe i orh oh 9 h oonemmii R I ( T wd a eeE D wI I pt t w l a tv { /s Mo g
- l.a
- d.
RAC REVIEW 0F THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE APR30 m) RADIOLOGICAL EMERCENCY RESPOllSE PLAN FOR SEARROOK (Revision Dated 11/05) h Page S1 of E { 4 i e a" jE
Response
Remedial ( E RAC Ceements/ Recommendation de State Response Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate ACLise I* (A) Complete ej tnede-(C) l jg y{ t. 1 e.pi. ._L (t) (t) I
- e. o gl4 requiring esclueton area passes, and emergency workers who would be required to enter the esclusion area (bes drivere, bus guides, ambulance drivers, etc.).
For esample: l (I) p. 2.6-I6, itee 5 - How eeny .(l) The sean dostmeters provided to' destanters and what kind / range-am*rgaacy erkers will be issuad with ,,[**,'*"N' g, 'E ' ',, f *. are avattable to be issued with Recleston Area Paeseet t wl te, .5 .att. The <t21 See J.to.J. Table 2.7-1 is a 38918 (2)
- p. 2.7-l and Table 2.7-8 8 st of the types and amounts of dostmetry equipment evallable in local destaetry equipment listed would Note be inedequate to servic*
Eocs for local emergency workers. that 200R doelmeters are included in the emergency workers and othere who e -777 Instrumentation sets la eed weeld need to enter the Esclusion community. Town specific quantitles are Aree la accordance with Section Identitled in Table 5 of each locet p. Table 2.7 1 alH be mvl oed M l 2.6 of the RERP. Notes CDV desteeters tieted do not have A saperate table Identifying dosimetry capability to measure doses in "I" 84"I **** 'id I" 2."7.2 I n Revision 2. P the recte for life-saving acttv-included in Section f 8ttee only (i.e., 75 R). Note that very few people are owpected to be given Euctusion Aree passes at any one time. Should it be necessary, 200R dosleeters are evallable et the IFO for issue to anyone assIgnart a life-saving duty in the Euclusion Area. 1
1 RAC REVIEW OF TIIE STATE OF IIEW llA88PseIIItE Q% RADIOt.0CICAL EBetaCEleCY Resp 0015E Pt.Aal FOR SEABROOK gg (Revielen Dated 11/85) FW Page M of _RJ e ~1 jE mespense Benedia e" I eac comonoto/Secaansedation Oe State Seepease Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequete Astice U (An eseptet r .g leed - (c)
- g y,
e gente Rosemple ,4 lN .,u (t) ' (I) In mo i Ef.s (3)
- p. 2.4-3 Stee 3 ~ If an outende on *=bulance crews are provided oost.etry at the staging ereas.
see Rocki ngham j echulence service must enter the County Procedures. Rev. l. Bacleates Area, are crew members provided destaetry? What radio-lagleet tralatng/ inst ructions are provided and by whom? M4 Accordtes to the plan, once releasee 7 of redteactive materlate have accorred, emergency workers will be teatracted to read tInett self-reading destestere every 85 minutes. Anthengin the treatment of thte element la the ytes le generally adequate, emnetderetten should be given to the felleutes esmonates (1)
- p. 2.7-3. Rest pera., Sec. 2.7.2
( t) Figure 2.7-l. Vo l. I shows the personal Energency workers should I$7,'"M [,'C,1,,ic, 5,'"x*r'o7ficN g hose /serry en espesure record Procedures (e.g., see p, IV 33 of 5* *%,,Pl an. Re 1) T la card stees they may have to re-g charge destaeters or enter / reference. j reester the Eactusion Area free o verlene access pointe. t .___I
RAC REVIEW OF Tile STATE OF llEW llAlePSHIRE
- R30 g RADIOLOGICAL EMERCENCY RESPOIISE Ft.AII FOR SEARROOK (Revision Dated 11/85)
Page E of g a e j2
Response
Remediat RAC Csaments/ Recommendation 5 State Response Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action .j i *. (A) Complete 'l' j,
- ', {
inade-(C) ,4 .", u quate Incomplete 2 (I) (1) N.2
- a. %
o A;y,& (2) Two esposure record-keeping forms csy for emergency workers are pro-vided in the plan (Fig. 2.7-8 and DPllS Procedures. Att. 6. Appendia F). The plan should specifF (2) At tscts.eert 6 ellt be deleted. Figure 2.7-1 elli be used where such a form is whether it is intended to use either of those forms, or both of the forms simultaneously. t l Mai The decision chain for authorizing 1 l emergency workers to incur exposures in excess of the PACS for the general g public is not well documented. l l The plan stipulates that the radio- { logical health technical advisor (RitTA) periodically evaluates worker ll esposures (DPHS Procedures. IFO RHTA). Further, only the DPHS dir-k ector or his deputy has responsiblitty i to authortaa exposures for emergency i I workers in excess of PACS (DPHS Frocedures, director).
- However, g
decision authority on who will remain i l l
RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF BIEW NANPSelltE RAD 101ACICA1. ENESCEllCV RESP 0llSE' Pl.All FOR SEAaROOK APR30 W (Revision Deted 11/85) Page 3 of m ~ e jE Seepense Anmodist 5 SAC Comments / Recommendation 5. State Response Action. O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Acties g I* (A) Complete .h .u[ Imede-(c) ,I l j: ..et.
- -a.pieu
- 8
.r (a) (I) I m; 8l mo M in the plume for " essential" (Sec. Sectlon 2.7.4 mill be revised to establish speelf te action tevels yp
- 2. 7.4) iserti et i R esposure (and based on dosleeter readings at l
similar threshold decisions) is not in which all emergency workers vili be trained to modify their the plan. The trigger level (s) at l which emergency workers will be trained [* ' "9 're g,e f to s.odify their supervison of exposure dosleetry readings, acre *requent i tould not be located in the plan. reporting of exposure
- levels,
- '*"'I'"'8 (such as State Police Troop A at
'and more frequent reporting of i access control points) exposure levels from local t0C's l to DPHS et the IFO. e section 2.7.4 will specif y who has f In addittee, in the DPHS Frucedures responsibility for deciding which (IFO Coorde. Cee. Emerg., p. S. Step emergency workers will be allowed h,'"""** 'E H, the epocific dose levels above which aanthertsettee is required should wify procedums to reflect W he specified, e.g., I rem whole body decision chain on lacreased eed 5 ran to thyreld. The referenced ewposure. Thls includes tocel supo i po e "*' P "m"Tk RFA PAGe give a 3 of values. In oc, p p
- dures, F
I
- addittee, prior to authortsing procedures, IFO Coordi nator
- nd OPHS DINctor P'*C*d"N's.
i esposures above these levels, con-procedure elderetten emot he given to chance 4 D*"d'" L will be modined to of emeceos of the mission, alternative reflect cons tderation of alssloa jt methode, accesetty of the mission, planning and alternatives to selecties of volunteers, amourance exposure. that dose received will not enceed the 'f easthetised dose levels, etc. These n
RAC REVIEW 0F Tilt STATE OF IIEW 18AleFSellRE RADIOI.0CICAL EMERCENCY RESP 000SE PLAll FOR SEABROOK ,3 j% (Revision Deted 11/M ) Fece E as 33 t. i e 4 j$ Besponse Gemedia b SAC Cements /Secommendation 5, State Seepense Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate aetice 4 13 (A) Comptes l j:I' .c[ f, Imede-(c) e, ete i.e. pie (I) (I) U gj pg g ceasideratione could be described on c,sV the emerseecy esposure authorisation fore (see App. L of the DrilS Fru-cedores). AS.ac The monitoring level at uhtch decon-I temimettee is performed to stated in the plan as 100 cpa above back-growed. This is the case for both people (3938 precedures. Appendia F. p. F.7) and vehicles (Appendia F. p* OPHS Appendix F3 (Rev.
- 1) Indlcates that F.9).
personnel are monitored eqeln after decon. It counts remain above too 0% over background effected person is sant for e Mauever, the levels of contaminstton decon check W en HP at the decon center. If which regatte addittoaa! actions (bio = necessary the HP ullt send the contaminated essa,e) e, -her tr.ac.a.. ouid.i.. =,,,'or ; ~ " ', ';;*-';,te.in't , e w st.te. se the,i. n~ essa,. f5.6 The
====a for radiototicat decoa-I tasteettee of evacuees and emergency workers are detailed in the plan. (See SM Frecedures. App. F). Neuever, the ave 11abt!1ty of sufft-cteet researces to carry out the l decentaminetten is questionable. l v - I
l n 3 5 -b2!;~ 151*
- )
f 23 [1 ' .TSI30 83 Is L: I 3 a O 5 M i i e b 4 0: E S~ 5 E gg uotteldeos ;o eseg posse {oad gm 5w S 3r-e gN:, w a WE3 .2 a ma t. M-32 B WI g 35" 2 f _N E = u = 4 W ~:-: 8 e _z o 2 .3 (!) assebopeur (y) esenbspy 515t 2843 4 7112 2 3 J " 2 '. 2 -t 3"**, 2 A 8:2
- is 2
- .
-.g..o.g m u if a-e-
- j$28l85 s
23 0 231 4 a l'.;m $$.'5 1 * "g g4:: _: y:
- e. :
o 1 g..2 5 8 2 m!"b3~0 3 :t t P ~4 1 1 8 i e 108
- 2
- 3. 2,2s gta!!:
3- ..t= 2 - 3 4" -4 t ]!]Ett et a 1223 g-g!.
- 2.
i l 20)) 3: T. m a sm22 2 I a 1:g <:"88 88 8gi H 4: 1 l e-- 3
- 2. i : _:
21313 lits: 5 j 4> y} wei-* *== sususg
RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF BIEW NAMP$lilRE ,ng9g RADIOLOCICAL EMERCEIICV BESp0IISE PLAll FOR SEARROOK (Revision Deted 11/05) Page 89 of M
Response
Remedie? j ~E RAC Evaluation of State Response &4 equate Acties RAC Comments / Recommendation State Response Action tAl complet. T* Inade-(c) gI Au{ quote Incomploi ,4 2 (1) (1) lE I.
- a. o (2) r.
Rev. I of Appendlu F to DPHS d'E& (2)
- p. 2.5-l. sec. 2.8.1 - Radiolog-referretQ e
c,.eV teally conteelnated individuals 7,,,epreertterts f medical core fecisittes, i.e.. should not he sent to hospitals. d*C # **'**** * * Qualtited personnel should do and persistent readings of more then o.$5mR/hr above background. decostastnation at decon factil-Etee. Criteria ahould be 2. This etop of the procedure wIII be re lected en host community pian e developed, however, for f olloir-up dec ntaminan on procedures la es coetaminated individuals. Rev. 2. (3) DetBS Procedures, App. F, p. 6, 3. Rev. 2 of AppendIn F and host 4 procedures will provide c,omunity or consuffetton between the Step II.R.I.a - It is easier to Dacontaminetton Supervisor end the esatter (and less Itkely to be RHTA regarding medical EOC,errats for decontaminetton. A crose-coatseinated) if the person essere the clothing while being 4 Modify DPHS Procedures for Decon-moettered. If the person was temtnation Supervisor and EOC RHTA essering this clothing outside, to be consistent with ftem H 86 *** this to the meet !!kely part of a persee to be contaminated. 33 DPHS Procedures Appendix F, Rev. I C '' '*- i Further. Step II.B. I.b( 5)( a) states to monitor the indt-vidual's feet. 18 the shoes were removed in above referen(ed step, then the only 1thely source of coetamination is from the pseettering Center. 6 l N [ l
a 0 W 1 isP.! 3 I^- 'a t 33 [1 * .T331" 23
- e o
O E aa. 4 o .E. 3 l ~ w W" 5 a d uo}2st oog 30 yg g on aseg posss[oad +5 gm 3
- sI E w:
g I E g j C 4 - a.! N B E.- t. %35"s 3 5 3 a l W. E 2 (I) stenbepsut (y) stenbspy 3 %.'. : 3Sti3 9== C U C 18.,2 215 m 5 21
- 1 0
!1:25 1'1 I i
- 7. *, 2. ' F :3 ". I "
l .3:32 gs =,3: .:2 : 2 e 3:tse s's -e :s "3 3 3 3 1122At]! a : a !1 [18 1. 3 .331!I (3
l l l RAC REVIEW 0F THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE APR30g RADIOLOGICAL EMERCENCY RESPONSE Pl,AN FOR SEABROOK (Revision Deted 11/85) i Page 91 of M n e aU j '$ Bespense Beendial RAC Comments / Recommendation Oe State Response Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action I.". (A) Ceestate ee U Inade-(C) j [r .u{ a t. ..c pl.t j* h (s>- (1) 4./ As indicated in Section 2.8.4 (p. 2.8-A
- 4) and Table 2.8-1 ( p.
2.8-5), there are 13 local hospitats and medical factittlee capable of treating radia-tton accident pattents. The abtILty of these hospitals to care for indt-viduate esposed or contaminated by radietton to supported by written pro-cedures (p. 2.5-4) en accordance with s their agreement with the Jotna Cemets-ston on Accreditation of Hospitals. Letters of agreement with the hospitale are referenced in Section 4.1 ( p. 4.5-l) and in Appendix H ( p. M-l). However, it to noted that only updated letters of agreemant ulti be tactu%d as Vol. S. Rev. 2.No other SCtlan IS a listing of the letters le provided, not the actual letters. The letters I themselves should be reviewed to ensure that hospital capabilities are documented. Furthermore, local N pres to mm tm nMtn medical control must be established that designates res pons t bt it t y to a medical director who has dectaton-esking responsibility on all medical toeves. e e e i
f RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF NEW IIAMPSHIRE APR 301986 RADIOLOGICAL EMERCENCY RESPONSE PLAN FOR SEABROOK (Revision Dated !!/85) Page 91 of W ~ ~ e l jo
Response
Emedia. RAC Co m ts/ Recommendation b5 State Response Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adettuate Acties l." (A) Complete 'n' j I O{ Inade-(C) .u t. ..c .t N 3.E. E. (I) (1)
- a. o J. 3 See commente for L.l.
Table 2.8-! (p. A No action planned. 2.5-5) tiets the name of the medical
- factitty, ice
- location, and its capacity in terms of patients who have espertenced excessive esposure to radiation, and patients requiring medical care as weit as radiologically contaetnoted.
L.4 Raergency medical transportation is I. provided by local ambulance services (p. 2.8-2). According to Section 2.s.3 et the plan, services within the jurtediction of local dispatch centers a (Reckingham County Dispatch for Seabreek), are coordinated by the dispatch coater. During an emergency respeese, services outside the local dispat,ch service area will be acquired by the Bureau of Emergency Medical Services and coordinated by the dispatch center (p. 2.8-2).
- However, soon commente relative to parts of the plan need to be considered.
For esamplet I
l t f I [ RAC REVIEW 0F THE STATE OF NEW NAMPSHillE l RADIOLOCICAl. EMERCENCY RESPONSE Pt.AN FOR SEARAME APR 301566 (Revision Deted 11/85) Page Q,of g, E
Response
Remedial j 'O i RAC Comments / Recommendation State Response Action RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Acties u (A) C .t. .>I Inade-(c) H .d ..ete i i. e. n) o) N.
- a. o 4.. '/
(1) The Procedures for the Rockingham pj County Dispatch Center make no reference to providing coordina-H) The r3dlo Control of enbulance servlee within the dispatch eroe is one of the tion for ambulance services. The normal duties of the Rockinghse County summary of responsibilities in Dispatch. Pb procedure is needed to guide them on Section 1.3.3 for the Rockingha* this routine duty. Volume I section County Dispatch Center (p. l.3-I.3.3 vill be modlfled to note depend-this normel dispatch function.
- 19) also does not make reference
,ence on
- GA.
In conjunction with EMS, will to this. In addition, Procedures coordinate embulence service required to for the nureau of Energency %% **p,,,8,y,'*dN89 gm"*'9@ Medical Services were not avatt-be provided in Rev. 2. able in the plan for review. (2) Listings of ambulance services available in the State of New Mempshire and all out-of-state ambulance services Itcensed in New Maepshire are provided in (2) Letters of agreement with subulence Appendia J of the plan. However. services are included in Vol. 5. no letters of agreement with Additional letters will be included in Vol. S. Rev. 2. Likewise bus conversion these ambulance services are hits now on order which erable buses to available or referenced in the serve as multiple pass er enbulances. P an, will,b,e, reflected,,in the Resources l e,,, ,,,,py,c,
RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF llEW llAMPSHIRE RADIOLOGICAI. EMERCENCY RESPOllSE pl.AII FOR SEARROOK (Revision Deted 11/85) I' '
- N page 94 of 109 e
e s "E
Response
Remedial RAC Comments /Recommsendet ion 5 e, State Response Action "O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Accies d i 1* (A) Complete l h"I "{ inade-(C) 9 te i-empiec e
- 3-
- 2. m.
(I) (I) 131 %ulence crews are to be provided alth 44
- p. 2.0-3* teen 3 - If an out side dostmotry at the steglng grees.
(,.y)/ ambislance service must enter the Likewise and>ul ance crews will be Rectueton Area, are crew members provided with redlological emergency response trefning (the progree is provided dostmetry? What radia-ongoing). Distribution of dostmetry logical training / instruction, arc will be added to vol. I section 2.8.3. It is already reflected in the provided and by whost 4 Rock in9 h 8" County Sheriff's Department procedures included in Vol. 4, Rev. l. .e t e l App. J What resources Tralq res W We e% available from each ambuli. - ) will be evallable for review at NHCDA by service? Are all trained (*. the time Rev. 2 ls published, give to radiological aspects uf response? Which aret ta' ine oravious responses to #2 and 83. NJ Ceneral plans for reentry and recovery I u,,_,ce,,,,on,, from protective actions are described g established in the New Hangsshire Rules for in plan Section 2.9.2 (pp. 2.9-8 to ' control of Radletion will be Incorporated into Appendix T as a gecifle dose conen8tment -3). The criteria and decision-making criterion agelnst which the re-entry deClslon process for determining whether re-will be considered. EPA draf t guldance will covery can take place are described be Inewp rated into Appendix T. i for recovery from sheltering (p. 2.9-f. Revise OPHS Director procedures to B), recovery f rom evacuation (p. 2.9- ,,8d'" ',#IC,a " natM ar 1 2), and recovery from food and water 11.8.. f ormat ion of an Exclusion ,,,, ', " N "Wh"M control ( p. 2.9-3). However, these descriptions in the plan are too vague 2. Revi se Mont twing Team procedures, to be of any value. Recovery should IFD Accident Assessor procedures, and Monitoring Teen coordinator procedures to include reentry / e recovery ane1ysIs and dec1sIons.
I RAC REVIEW OF TIIE STATE OF BIEW liANFSHIRE RADIOLACICAI. EttESCEllCV BESPOIISE FIAI FOR SEABROOK APR 30 886 i (sevision Dated 11/85) Fase y et y j "g sospense namedia ~ RAC Comments / Recommendation State Response Action RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Actles I ** 1.': (A) comple T Imede-(c) I "h *r quate Incompte 2. (1) (I) N.2
- a. o N./
be ceasidered separately from de-3. Revtse section 2.9.2 to conform to pr o-cedures and Appendir T and C.tv escalation of plant emergency classes. EPA draf t guidance on reentry / recovery. Criteria for reentry in terms of dose commitmente must be spectile. This dectates will be hard enough to make 'f with each criteria, but without, it will be estremely difficult. Also, in the DFllS Procedures ( Di r., I Cen. Emerg. p. 7 Step 18), reentry must slee conalder the possibility that contaminated areas eight entst ashte4 may warrant clean-up or prohibit reentry of evacuated persons. /f J* The RERP does not describe a recovery .I Section 2.9.2 of Vol. I will be revised to orgselsetten and any changes from the no, that the New Hagshire Emergency Rowonse Orgentration does not change with e I,l emergency organisation. switch from energency response to recovery end rg-entry SCtivities. The Cross reference Ig Section 2.l.2 of the plan indicates la vol. t. Part 5 vlII also be corrected to ref er to ~2.9.2* vs *2.I.2* now li sted. that teforming the members of the emergency response organizations that g a recovery operation is to be intti- .g sted will follow the same notification . ' P. I.I
RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF NEW llA40PSHIRE RADIOLOGICAL EMERCENCY RESP 000SE pt.All FOR SEARROOK APR 30 86. 19 (Revision Dated 11/85) Page 16_ *f let_ n ji
Response
Remedial ~ State Response Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Acties RAC Comments / Recommendation I* (A) Ceaplete 'h' h' 0{ Inade-(C)
- 9. ate i.c iete E m:
L (t) (I) e
- a. o yy procedures as that employed for y,y changes in emergency classtitcation levels (p. 2.5-7).
However, there is no discueston of how recovery would affect changes in the organisational structure of the emergency response organisation. This should be clartited in the plan. N. 8/ Section 2.9.3 provides a general A description of the provisions for periodically estimating total popula-tion espesure ( p. 2.9-4). These eettantes will be made using popula-tion distribution information, mont- '{ toring data, disperston calculations, plant
- releases, meteorology, and I
sheltering / evacuation information. Total population exposure estimates will be compiled at least daily during a General Emergency. (p. 2.9-4). Although estimating total population An appendiu describing methodology used to
- h* o Ng* hoc resYnneT'5.
esposure was generally described, the specifte methodology was not presented i
.t RAC REVIEW OF TIIE STATE OF IIEW liAMPSHIRE RADIOLOCICAR. EMERCEIICY RESPOIISE Pt.AII FOR SEABROOK APR 301gg (Revision Deted 11/85) Page y of 3 {7 e E Seepense Bemedial j 'O l SAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate acties tac co m te/ Recommendation d. State Response Action, (A) comptese g 8" .j smede-(c) l jg g[ ., u quote ~ Incomptese b (1) (1) 3.e
- e. o fy.af in dotatt. In addition (see p. 2.9-4, G.r/
Sec. 2.9.3). the total population dose esttentee should not be tied to FAC levels. The latter are based on g projected individual dose commitments. I& M./.4 Ilew Eampshire has indicated in the A plas (p. 3.5-3) its intent to parti-c1pete le annual esercises to test the emergency response organtaatton's IE integrated capabilities, a'r't i c ip at ion f Nowever, with the switch to biennial p in exerci ses reflect biennfal esercisee (every two years), does Isew at both seebrook and vermont Yankee. Hampehtte really intend to participate in se esercise each year? 3 M/.6 3 "The plan description of esercises is I generally adequate. Although the plan states (p. 3.1-4) that the date and time of the esercises will coincide with the schede!!ag agreed upon with the utility, other states, the NetC and e a FEMA, no specific provisions for night or umane.ounced esercises are a seei 'on 3. 8.5 all t be revised to ref lect that prowlsions will be made for night and 2nannounced exercises as required. j a I3
RAC REVIEW 0F THE STATE OF IfEW HAMPSHIRE APR 301986 RAD 10LOGICA!. EMERCENCY BESPONSE Pl.AN FOR SEARROOK (Revision Deted !!/85) Page 3 of E E
Response
Remedial 8 RAC Comments / Recommendation Oe State Response Action O *O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Actica =j I *. (A) Ceeplete jg y{ Inade-(C) g; pu quate Incomplet e (1) (1) y n described. New Hampshire states that w,/ tt will participate in a post-emercise critique and the formulation of cor-rective actions, when needed (pp. 3.5-5 and -6). The provisions for the testing within a ets-year period of all major ele-ment s on a e t t e-s pec i f ic basis except he mqulmments of M m NI will be for ingestion regulated elements as added to vol. 1. Section 3.1.5. set forth in PEMA guidance armorandum PR-l should be added to the plan. pg.a Communications det!!s are described in A plan Section 3.l.2 ( p. 1.1 -1 ). The frequency of drills for specific communications links are listed on Table 3.5-1 (P. 3.1-2). The descriptions in the plan are generally adequate;
- houever, the requirements of PEMA CM PR-l should be The requirements of FEM 04 PRal will be added to vol. I. Section 3.1.2.
added to the plan. l m
l i i l l l i l RAC REVIEW 0F TIIE STATE OF NEW NAMPSHIRE RADIOLOGICAL DIERCEIICY BESP000SE Pt.All FOR SEARROOc APR 30 m. (Revision Dated 11/05) Page E of 33.,' q f e -O E Respense Samediet j *C BAC Co m ts/ Recommendation Oe State Response Action RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Acties e I* (A) Cagnete -l g:i u[ leede-(c) E ote me.,i.e 3.:. L u) (s)
- a. o A47 c The description of emergency medical A
No change suggested. dr111e to the plan ( p. 3.1-3) is adequate. These det!!s will be held annually. gt.al The plan description ( p. 3.5-3) of 1 The plan.Ill be modified to reflect annual combined redtelegical monitoring and decontamination monttoring dritts. The health physica drills is generally change will be made et Section 3.1.4 adequate. These drills util be con-I ducted at least eest-annually and will 1 include the laboratory analysis of field samples with slaulated high radteactive activities.
- Ilowever, where are det!!s described for the monitoring and deconteetnation of j
individuals? The drt!!s should include activation of a Reception / Decentanteettee Center. l Af t.c. (See conneet for is.2.d) I see prevtous rewonse. g,g Prowletene for esercises are adequate-A No change suggested. m ly described in plan Section 3.8.5 (pp. 3.5-3 to -6). Objectives will be MII estabitehed relative to the emergency
RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF isEW HAMPSHIRE APR 30886. RADIOLOGICAL ENERCENCY RESPONSE Pt.All FOR SEARANK (Revision Deted 11/85) Page 100 of 109 E
Response
Remedial ~ j 'O RAC Cosesents/ Recommendation State Response Action RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action .j T.* (A) complete l' jg y{ In.de-(C) g; gu quote Incomplete
- g (I)
(1)
- c gg Aff response functions to be esercised (p.
- J, 3.5-4).
The date and time period for py,r the esercise scenario will coincide with the schedu!!ng agreed upon with g the utility, other states, the NRC, and FEMA ( p. 3.1-4). NHCDA ws!! describe each emergency factitty and the organisations that will partict-pate in the esercise (p. 3.5-4). The schedule of esercise events will be but!t around the initiating events at the power plant, and additional off-site events will be added by NHCDA to meet the esercise objectives (p. 3.5-4). The esercise scenario will include a narrative summary describing the conduct of the esercise (p. 3.1-5). Esercise observers will be proeided with advance copy of the scenario and of the plans and procedures to be tested (p. 3.5-5). t 4
i RAC REVIEW 0F Tite STATE OF MEW NAMPStilRE RADIOLOGICAL EMERCENCY RESPONSE Pt.AN FOR SEARROOK APR 30 W (Revision Dated 11/85) Page 101 of 109 .jg
Response
Remedian ~ State Response Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Acties RAC Commente/ Recommendation 1.* (A) Ceeplete g
- g O{
Inade-(C) g'
- u quote Inceeplete fr *,
8 (I) (I) d 3
- a..o AA8f Adequate provisions are included in A
No chag e suggested. the plan for observing, evaluating, and critiquing the esercise (pp. 3.1-l 5 ). A critique will be held as soon as poselble after the esercise, and I thte will be followed by a turnal r evaluation. i N. 5 The plea edequately describes the pro-A No chage suggested. visione for revleutng the formal evalmetton and for Septementing corrective actions, when needed (pp. 3.5-5 and -6). All corrective actions i will be Septemented prior to the nest major annual esercise (p. 3.5-6). O./,6 The plan describes the radiological A? emergency response training that will be provided to all organtaat tons that f comprise the New Hampshire Emergency l Response Orgentastion (pp. 3.2-t to -4). Training will be provided at least on an annual basis (p. 3.2-l). Training will be provided by New 4 a Haapahlre for agency directorm and 3 4 I f
l-RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF NEW llAMPSHIRE RADIOLOCICAL EMERCENCY RESPONSE Pl.AN FOR SEARROOK (Revision Deted 11/85) APR30 n i 4 Page 102 of 101 e O "E
Response
Remedia! RAC Comments / Recommendation d. State Response Action "O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Actica ( T3 (A) Complets l jh
- {
Inade-(C) 4 .", u quote Incompte N.:e
- e. %
(1) (I) 2 o 0.f. & emergency planning coordinators (pp. cd 3.2-1 and -2), for staff involved in accident assessment ( p. 3.2-2), for radiological monitoring and analysis tease (p. 3.2-2), for police inwnived in accese control functions ( p. 3.2-g r 3), for stoical support and rescue f personnel (p. 3.2-3), for personnel tavolved with support services at reception center factittles (pp. 3.2-3 and ~4), and for personnel who have b key roles in notificatton and emergency communications ( p. 3.2-4). b The state will also support the [ trainJng ef forts of the municipalttles F within the plume exposure EPZ (p. 3.2-A). The training program, however, was Description of training programs In M t. I rather weakly described. Training to Sectfon 3.2 will M rewtowed aw enhancM. be provided to mutual aid agencies ),* ',' D, NZ*'fl9 [c g =I t In sect (fire and ambulances) was not found. 3.2.2. 4 (See element L. 4) I l l
i l RAC AEVIEW 0F THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSillRE APR 30 g' RADlotACICAL EMERCENCY ltESPONSE Pt.AN FOR SEA 8R00K l (Revision Dated 11/85) Page ly of E ~ e E
Response
Remedial j 'O RAC Ceements/ Recommendation r!' ate Response Action RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action e e ;; I* (A) Ces, tete 2g Inade-(C) 'h', u quate Incomplete 2 (s) (t) N.=-.
- a..
o 0 '/ In seaeral. Section 3.2.2 of the plan A? adequately provides for the initial training and annual retraining of radiological emergency response personnel (pp. 3.2-1 to 3.2-5). As indicated in Section 1.2.4 ( p. 3.2-5), I this training wt11 be adelnistered by the IRICDA Emergency Planning Coordt-notor. Section 3.2.4 should be adJed Section 3.2.4 elli be added to the to the cross-reference inden. Also cross-reference Indeu in vol. 1 Section 5. see comments for O.l.b. Although generally
- adequate, the i-training progree description was j
somewhat vague, especially in regard to element 0.4.c (training for person-sne response 0.I.b. l nel monitoring and decontamination). (Also, see comments for elements N.2.d and N.2.e.) 05 (s. co==ents for 0.l.b and o.4) A ,,,,,,,,,,,, c,,,e,ece,,,,y. 4 I
l RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF llEW HAMPSHIRE RADl01OCICAL EMERCENCY RESP 000SE Pl.AN FOR SEARROOK N8* !* 3 0 9 (Revision Dated II/85) Page 104 of 109 e O 45
Response
Remedial RAC Comments /Recommendat ion 5. State Response Action "O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Actice .4 i *. (A) Complete I' t Inade-(C)
- a Au{
quote Inceeplete 2 (I) (I) d Nm
- a. %o F.8 The plan (p.
3.2-1) adequately de-A No change requested. l ecribes the provisions for training of individuals responsible for the plan-ning effort (e.g., agency directors and emergency planning coordinators). 7.1 The individeals with overall authority A No change requested. and responsibli t t y for radiological emergency response planning within each of the response agencies are listed in Table 3.3-1 (p. 3.3-2). These individuals are designated as georgency Fianning Coordinators for their ergentrations, and are respon-elble for coordinating the planning efforts of their own agencies with IRtCDA. Tbts includes informing NHCDA of any updating of plans, and dis-seelnating revisions to the RENP to emergency workers within their agencise. The Director of letCDA is respomelble for the development, distributton, maintenance and testing of the New Hampshire REkP (p. 3.3-1). f
i BAC REVIEW 0F Tile STATE OF NEW IIAMPSHIRE APR30 g RADIOLOCICAL EMERCENCY RESP 0tISE PLAll FOR SEASA00K (Revision Dated 11/85) Page g of 3. ) ~ e j '5 Besponse Bemedial RAC Csaments/ Recommendation State Response Action O BAC Evaluation of State Response Adegenste Acties g" aj i* (4) Complete l j-0{ inede-(c) er E u guste locomplet N ~2 L (1) (t)
- e. o P.3 (See comments for p.2)
A No change requested. P.4 Flee Sections 3.3.2 and 3.3.3 (pp. g 3.3-1 to -3) provide for updating of the plae and agreements and an annual I certification that the plan is cur-rent. The Director of IntCDA is re-l spomelble for these tasks (p. 3.3-3). l Based en the present review, huwever. The plan reviewed by rpm ves updated for ~, ll M. Rev. I was issued Jm 2.1%6 Rev. tt does not appear that the plan has, 2 Is tn process. to fact, been significantly updated. Although the procedures f or letCDA and Dpits were substantially t'evi sed, much of the Rett itself does not appear to have been updated. A number of con-tacts and fact!!Eles appear to be out-g dated as did the list of " current" l, letters of agreement. In particular, the following comments require considerettoes (1) pp. 6.1-1 and 6. l local plan g li Local plan revisions are included in Rev. 1. Section 6.0 will be m ised I8 revision dates have not been in-mage reference is 6.0-1 not 6. l. ) for cluded as indicated on p. 6.1. Re v. 2. l l
RAC REVIEW OF Tile STATE OF IIEW llANpSHIRE RADI0tictCAL EMERCENCY RESPOIISE Pt.AN FOR SEARROOK s30m (Revasion Dated !!/85) Pate 106 et 109 ~ e 5" j 'OE
Response
Benedial i RAC Comumente/ Recommendation State Response Action RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Acties i2 f4) complete .l j:j "g in de-(C) .u ,u.t. lace.pl.a. I "E I. % (t) (1) e h o P.4 (2) App. C - The Appendis indicates
- 82) The Wol. 2 Appendix G reference to a se
[M'/) that the school / institutional ellt be deleted. Note, however, that local plans. Appendia F, include speclel listings are keyed to a . ap.. m facility p lans ulth esps showing the Me such map is provided ur refer-location of special facilities for esced. Rev. 1. 'i (3) App. K - For the Seabrook
- 13) Appendix K has been edated in Rev.
I. municipalttles it was noted that The phone nunters of Appendix A to local no changes have been made in n r p poettions or phone numbers since edeted in Rev. 2. 11/34 It was also noted that the same vacancies that entsted in 1984 esist in the " current" Itating. Mas the list been updated?
- p. S According to the
- plan, at least Af annually the NHCDA Director wt11 certify that the plan reflects current 8
emergency preparedness status and will tease updated copies to FEMA, to the I Raergency Planning Coordinator for g each agency within the New Hampshire Emergency Response Drgantastion, to the Civt! Defense Directorm of the e
I RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF IIEW NAlePSHIRE RADIOLOCICAl. EMERCENCY RESFOstSE Pt.All FOR SEARROOK (Revision Dated !!/85)
- 30 W Page Ig of {g U
E RAC Co m ts/ Recommendation do' State Response Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Actie# Aesponse Remedia h~
- j
}{ (A) Complets g 63 3g gg Inede-(C) gg g; g pu quote Incomptet qg gg (I) (I) P.5 munte s p.It tles within the Seabrook Coat'd Plues esposure EPZ, to the power plant operstors, and to other people holding i controlled copies of the RERP. All revised pages of the plan will be dated and marked to show where changes I have been made, according to the l P an. However, the revised pages in This practice began with Revision i Issued the current plan have M been so June 1986. marked and dated. i M( A Itsting of local plans which support A No plan change required, the How Hampshire RENP is provided in Section 6.2 (p. 6.2-3). The plan Itsting is for municipalttles within i the Seabrook pluer esposure EPZ, and for best consunteles (p. 6.0-l). R 8/ Emergency response procedures for each A of the agencies in the New Hampshire emergency response organization for 4 the Seabrook station are included in the plan as a separate volume (Volume 4). Each of these procedures is 1
l h b( ;' RAC REVIEW OF Titt STATE OF IIEW llA80PSHIRE 4 RADIOLOGICAL EMERCENCY RESPoleSE Pt.AN FOR SEARROOK (Revision Dated !!/85) Page 108 of 109 p rl j 'E
Response
Remedial RAC Ceemente/ Recommendation State Response Action O RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action ji .j 12 (A) Coe, tete jj jg g[ tende-(C) Jg g; pu quate Inceeplete g ga gg (I) (I) R rf Itated in Section
- 7. 2 (p.
7.2-l). (c,./~r) This listing also includes the sections of the plan to be implemented by escit procedure. t The use of tabs on divider sheets Dtvider tabs witi be provided with the next would fact!! tate use of the plan and major Rev. to the plem. 8 procedures. RJ' The plan contains a table of contente A and a crose-reference listing of plan sections to the evaluation criteria (individual elemente) of NuitEC-0654, FEMA-REP-8, Revision I (pp. 5.1-8 to 5.8-4). The crose-ref erence indes is g generally adequate but could be i taproved by adding references to The cross reference will be updated, to I. opecific sections of the toplementing l"C' 3{FO'*dC8'*"*8' '"* P'"C*d"#* ** procedures weiere appropriate. I-e
AFn30 W RAC REVIEW OF THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE AOo RADIOLOCICAt. ENERCENCY RESPONSE PLAN FOR SEABROOK (Revision Deted !!/85) l Page 101 af 109 i E
Response
seemedial ? .e l I RAC Comments / Recommendation d. State Response Action AO RAC Evaluation of State Response Adequate Action j"a ej I *. (A) Complate ,'[ Inade-(C) g.[. j -,u quate laceeplete
- E Ew (I)
(3) E la ao i Rip The plan indicates that the Director A No plan change requested. of the IslCDA will see that the telephone directory. Included as Appendia K of the plan. is reviewed .f for accuracy on a quarterly basis (p. l 3.3-3). LE6END.' ( A) = Element rated as " Adequate" (1) = Element rated as " inadequate" (f) = Rating erndetermined or not enosagh inf ormation to make evaluation .REVIATIONS: NBC = U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l ANL = Argonne National Laburatory ,FEptA = Federal Emergency Management Agency DOE = U.S. Department of Energy DOT = U.S. Department of Transportation l FDA = U.S. Food and Drug Administ ration USDA = U.S. Department of Agriculture DOC = U.S. Department of Commerce Itals = U.S. Department of Health and Human Services RAC = Regional Assistance Committee l' .}}