Text

Intervenor Exhibit I-MAG-069, Review & Evaluation of Seabrook Plan & Preparedness for Commonwealth of Ma Communities, Dtd May 1988
	ML20247G505
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	04/11/1989
From:	; Federal Emergency Management Agency
To:	;
References
	RTR-NUREG-0654, RTR-NUREG-654 OL-I-MAG-069, OL-I-MAG-69, NUDOCS 8905300419
	Download: ML20247G505 (154)
	v • d • e

{{#Wiki_filter:, h Ad0$~ 6T J '! Q!jf-

a9 MY 23 P3 :40 l

t arr o,- DOCKi ;itc, i ;;,.f{y 5fi A Nc- _ REVIEW AND EVALUATION OF SEABROOK PLAN AND PREPAREDNESS FOR MASSACHUSETTS COMMUNITIES t 909 M4 4 J %d O o !!"c' t fa F,n^UL ATORY CC". MISSION i,0 +M3 4L ' : t h.S O: wi t C l _. C"r. i -? b b. ! h. _b_. i': . Goblic bHIt_Co._oW_4Mn'PGhd h s > 1 SD.S~__. 390 M A 4 i: / ,IhakCp._.',"_!-111L&3._.-.- O C. .. i.: i(c, m.. _ _... f Federal Emergency Management Agency May 1988 890 MOO 419 890411 l PDR ADOCK 05000443 C PDR vNru /

_. = (: l g. i 'f? f .g f u CONTENTS t. B A C K G R O U N D'.......................................................... xiv p

I NT R O D U C TI O N..........................................................

xy R E VI E W S P E C I FI C S................. :..................................... xvi A C R O N Y M S.............................................................. xv i l l PLANNING STANDARDS AND EVALUATION C RITERIA '....................... 1 A. Assignment of Responsibility (Organization Control)(Planning Standard A).......................................................... 1 A 1.t. . Evalu ation Cri t e ria '....f....................................... 1 S t a t e m e n t.....~............................................... 1 Plan R e f e r e n c e............................................... 2 Ev alu a t i o n s................................................... 2 A.I.b. Evalu a tio n C ri t e ria............................................ 2 Statement.................................................... 2-Pla n R e f e r e nc e................................................ 2 E v a1 u a t i o n '.................................................... ~ 3 A.I.c. Evaluat io n C rit e ri a............................................ 3 . Statement...........................................g........ 3 ' Plan R e f e r e n c e............................................... 3 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 3 'A.1.d.' E valu at io n C ri t e ri a............................................ 3 Statement.................................................... 3 Plan R e f ere nc e............................................... 4 E v aluat i o n................................................... 4 A.I.e. Evaluation Crite ria............................................ 4 Statement.................................................... 4 Plan R e fe r e nc e............................................... 5 E v alua t io n................................................... 5 A.2.a. . Evaluat ion Cri t e ria............................................ 5 Statement.................................................... 6 Plan R e f e r e n c e............................................... 6 E valua t i o n................................................... 6 A.2.b. Evaluation Criteria............................................ 7 Statement.................................................... 7 Plan R e f er e nc e............................................... 7 Ev al ua t i o n................................................... 7 A.3. Evalua tio n Cri t e ria............................................ 7 Statement....... 7 ' Plan R e f e r e n c e............................................... 8 E valu a t i o n................................................... 8 1 1

g [ Q;(t 1~,,,' May 1983- %y u i ? it

.s

-i. ~ CONTENTS (Cont'd) r 7 A.4. E valua t io n C rit e ri a............................................ - 8: Statement....................................................- 8-u Pla n R e f er e n c e............................................... 9 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 9-C.. Emergency Response Sdpport and Resources (Planning Standard C)............ 10 C.1.a. ' E valua tio n C rit e ria............................................ 10 Statement................................................... 10 g - Plan R e f e r e n c e............................................... 10 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 10 E' C.1.b. Evaluation C rit e ri a........................ r....,............ - 10' o Statement...........#....................................... 10 P l a n R e f e r e n c e '........ '....................................... 11 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 11 L C.1.c. Evalua tio n C ri t e ri a............................................ 11 Statement.................................................... 11 Pla n R e f e r e n c e.....'.......................................... 11 E v alu a t i o n.................................................... 11 C.2.a. Evaluation Crit eria............................................ 11 Statement.................................................... 11 Plan R e f e r e n c e............................................... 12 E v alu a t io n.................................................... 12 C.2.b. Evalua tio n C ri t e ria............................................ 12 Statement.................................................... 12 Plan R e f e re n c e............................................... 12 E valu a t i o n................................................... 12 C.2.c. . Evalu a tio n C ri t e ria............................................ 12 Statement.................................................... 13 Plan Re f e r e n c e............................................... 13 E v alua ti o n................................................... 13 C.3. Evaluation C rit eria............................................ 13 Statement.................................................... 13 Plan R e f e r e n c e............................................... 14 h E v alu a t i o................................................... 14 C.4. Evaluatio n C rit e ria............................................ 14 Statement.................................................... 14 Plan R e f er e n c e............................................... 15 E valua t i o n................................................... 15 C.5. Evalua tion Cri t eri a............................................ 15 Statement.................................................... 15 Pla n R e f e re nc e............................................... 16 Ev alu a t io n................................................... 16 ..11 l

m' l, /j l- ,r e 4 E q 4 IJ .Ir' tU iy, ( s m 1, May 1988

h. y i

t o i p - 7

{: q..r; g yj 1

j CONTENTS (Cont'd) J s D.c Emergency Classification System (Planning Standard D).................... 17 'j \\ D.3. - Evalustion Crit eria............................................ 17 S t a t e m e n t '.................................................... .17

P l an R e f e r e n c e......... '.......................................

17 E v al u a t i o n <................................................... 17 D. 4'.' Ev al ua t io n 'C ri t e ri a............................................ 17 . Statement.................................................... 17 - Plan R e f er e nc e..... '.......................................... '18 E v alu a t i o n.................................... <.............. .18 1 E. N$tification Methods and Procedures (Planning Standard E)................. 19 Evaluation ' Criteria... 9 m E.1. 19-f S t a t e m e n t. '................................................... 19- - Plan R e f e re n c e '............................................... 20 - E v al u a t i o n................................................... 20 i i E.2.. - E val u a tio n Cri t e ria............................................ 20 ~ '\\ J . Statement........................................... 20 ' P lan R e f e r e n c e............................................... 20 E val u a t i o n "... ~............................................... 20 v. E.3.L - E val ua tion C rit e ria. '........................................... 21' Statement......................................s............. 21 Plan R e f e r e n c e............................................... 21 . E v a! u a t i o n.................................................... 21 E.4. - Evaluation Criteria............................................ 21 Statement.................................................... 22 Plan R e f e r e n c e............................................... .22 E v al u a t io n................................................... 23 E.5, Evaluatio n C rit e ria............................................ 23 Statement.................................................... 23 Pla n R e f e re n c e............................................... 24 E valua t i o n................................................... 24 E.6. Evalua t io n C ri t e ri a............................................ 24 Statement.................................................... 24 Plan R e f ere n c e............................................... 25 E v alu a t i o n................................................... 25 E.7. - Evaluation Criteria.......,.................................... 25 Statement.................................................... 26 Plan R e f e re nc e............................................... 30-E v al u a t i o n................................................... 30 l l l 111 i

r_ 1 l. l l l Msy 1988 s CONTENTS (Cont'd) i i E.8. E v alu a tio n C ri t e d a............................................ 30 Statement.................................................... 30 Plan R e f e r e nc e............................................... 30 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 30 l F. Emergency Communications (Planning Standard F)......................... 31 F.1.a. Evaluation Criteria................ 4 31 i Statement.................................................... 31 Plan R e f e r e nc e............................................... 31 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 31 F.1.b. Ev alu at i o n C ri t e ri a............................................ 32 Statement...........a....................................... 32 P lan R e f er e n c e............................................... 32 { Ev al u a t i o n................................................... 33 l F.1.c. Evalu a t io n C ri t e ri a............................................ 33 Statement.................................................... 33 Plan R e f e r e n c e............................................... 33 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 33 i F.1.d. Ev alu a tio n C ri t e ria............................................ 33 Statement.................................................... 34 Plan R e f e r e nc e............................................... 35 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 35 F.1.e. Evalua tio n C rit eria............................................ 35 Statement.................................................... 35 Pl an R e f e r e nc e............................................... 35 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 36 F.2. Ev alu ation C rit e ria............................................ 36 Statement................................................... 36 j P lan R e f e r e nc e............................................... 36 I E v al ua t i o n.................................................. 36 F.3. Ev aluation C rit e ri a............................................ 36 Statement.................................................... 36 P lan R e f e r e nc e............................................... 37 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 37 G. Public Education and Information (Planning Standard G).................... 38 G.I. Ev aluation C rit e ria............................................ 38 Statement.................................................... 38 P lan R e f e r e nc e............................................... 39 Ev al u a t i o n................................................... 40 .LV

m. p# ns : a }qf$ ;.l 3 pl , P (,;. q ??.. May 1988 gm w y0 ' CONTENTS (Cont'd) 2 G.2. Ev alu atio n C ri t eria '.......................................... '.. 40 Statement.................................................... 40 'i Plan R e f e r e nc e............................................... 40 g?.K< E v al u a t i o n '................................................... 41 G.3.. Ev alu a tio n C rit eri a............................................ 41- ' Statement.................................................... 41 E Plan R e f er e nc e............................................... 41-E v al u a t i o n................................................... 41-G.4.a. Evalua tio n C rit e ria............................................ 41 1 Statement.................................................... 41 l P lan R e f e r e n c e.............................................. 42 E v alu a tio n............ e...................................... 43 1 G.4.b. Ev alu a tio n C ri t e ri a............................................ 43 43 State m e n t........................ Plan R e f e r e nc e............................................... 43 E v al u a t i o n.................................................... 43-G.4.c. Evalu atio n C rite ri a............................................ 43 Statement.................................................... 43 Plan R e f e r a nc e............................................... 44 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 44 L G.5. Ev alu ation C rite ri a............................................ 44 Statement.................................................... 44 Plan R e f e r e nc e............................................... 44 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 44 H. Emergency Facilities and Equipment (Planning Standard H)................. 45 H.3. Ev alu atio n C rite ria............................................ 45 Statement.................................................... 45 P lan R e f e r e n c e............................................... 45 Ev alua t io n................................................... 45 H.4. Ev aluation C rite ria............................................ 45 Statement.................................................... 45 Plan R e f e r e n c e............................................... 46 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 46 H.7. Ev aluation C rit e ria............................................ 47 Statement.................................................... 47 Plan R e f e re nc e............................................... 47 47 Ev alu a t io n................................................... H.10. Evaluation Criteria............................................ 47 47 Statement.................................................... Plan R e f ere nc e............................................... 48 Ev alu a t io n................................................... 48 v

y- !st i i

, b '.

.p-l - j 1 ~ ~ .May'1988 1 i b ( ,~n lx CONTENTS (Cont'd) 'H.11.- Evaluat io n C rit e ri a............................................ - '48 Statement.................................................... 48 ' Pla n R e f e r e n c e '............................................... 48 y E v al u a t i o n................................................... 48 H.12. ~ Evalu ati o n C ri t e ria '............................................ 48 t-Statement.................................................... 49 Plan R e f e r e nc e............................................... 49. - Ev al u at io n................................................... 49 l Accident Assessment (Planning. Standard I)...............'................. 50 !. 7..

S t a t e m e n t........... >......................................... -

50 . Evalu a tio n C ri t eri a............................................ 50 ~ P la n R e f e r e n c e........ '....................................... 50

E v al u a t i o n..................................................

50 ) I. 8. Evalua t io n C rit e ria............................................ 51 , Statement..........'..................'....................... 51 Pla n R e f e re nc e............................................... 52 Ev alu at i o n ' '................................................... 52 I. 9. Ev aluatio n Cri t e ria............................................ 52 f. Statement.................................................... 52 ' Plan R e f e r e n c e................................................ 52 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 52 1.10. Evaluati o n C ri t e ria............................................ 52 Statement.................................................... '53 Plan R e f e re nc e............................................... 54 E v alua t io n................................................... 54 I.11. Evalua tio n C ri t e ria............................................ 54 Statement.................................................... 54 P la n R e f e r e n c e............................................... 54 Eval u a t io n................................................... 54 -J. Protective Response (Planning Standard J)................................ 55 J.2. Evaluation Criteria............................................ 55 Statement.................................................... 55 . Plan R e f ere n c e............................................... 55 E val ua tio n................................................... 55 J.9. Evaluation Crit eria............................................ 55 Statement.................................................... 56 Plan R e f e r e n c e............................................... 58 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 58 71

~-!i 1 e W'# j sjk May 1938 1 .i' .),, .s n, 4 h. CONTENTS (Cont'd)' A h. J.10.a. Ev alu a t io n C ri t e ri a............................................ 58 Statement.................................................... 58 Pl a n R e f e r e n c e............................................... 59-E v al u a t i o n................................................... 59 l J.10.b. E val u a tio n Cri t e ri a...,........................................ 59 Statement.................................................... 59 P la n R e f e r e n c e.................................. '............. 59 p E v al u a t i o n................................................... 59 J.10.c. E v alu a ti o n C ri t e ria............................................ 59 Statement.................................................... 60 Plan R e f e r e n c e............................................... 60 E v al u a t i o n........... t'....................................... P J.10.d. Evalu a tio n C ri t e r ia............................................ - 60 Statement...................................... 60 Plan R e f e re n c e............................................... 61 E v al u a ti o n................................................... 62 J.10.e. Ev al u atio n C rit e ri a............................................ 62 Statement.................................................... 62 Plan R e f e r e nc e............................................... 63 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 63 J.10.f. Evaluatio n C rit e ria............................................ 63 Statement.................................................... 63 Plan R e f e r e n c e...........................,.................... 63 E v al u a t i o n.................................. '................. 63 J.10.g.- E valu a t ion C ri t e ri a............................................ 64 Statement.................................................... 64 Plan R e f e r e n c e.............................................. 65 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 65 t J.10.h. Evalu ation Crit e ria............................................ 65 Statement.................................................... 65 Plan R e f e r e n c e............................................... 66 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 66 J.10.1. Evaluatio n C ri t e ri a............................................ 66 Statement.................................................... 66 Plan R e f er e n c e............................................... 66 Ev al ua t i o n................................................... 67 \\ J.10.J. Evalua tio n Cri t e ria............................................ 67 Statement.................................................... 67 Plan R e f e r e nc e............................................... 67 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 68 711

L i i i May 1980 CONTENTS (Cont'd) J.10 k. E v alua t io n C ri t e ria............................................ 68 Statement.................................................... 68 Plan R e f e r e nc e............................................... 68 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 68 J.10.1. E val u a tio n C rit e ri a............................................ 68 Statement.................................................... 69 Plan R e f er e nc e............................................... 70 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 70 J.10.m.. Evaluation C rit eria........................................... s 71 Statement.................................................... 71 Plan R e f e r e n c e..... s......................................... 71 E v al u a t i o n.......... c'........................................ 71 J.11. Evalu a t i o n C ri t e ria............................................ 71 Statement.................................................... 72 Plan R e f er e nc e............................................... 74 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 74 J.12. Evalua t i o n C ri t e ri a............................................ 74 Statement.................................................... 74 Plan R e f e r e nc e............................................... 76 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 76 K. Radiological Exposure Control (Planning Standard K)....................... 77 K.3.a. Evalua tion C rit e ri a............................................ 77 Statement.................................................... 77 Plan R e f e r e nc e............................................... 78 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 78 K.3.b. Evalu atio n Crit e ria............................................ 79 Statement.................................................... 79 Plan R e f e r e nc e............................................... 79 Ev al u a t io n................................................... 79 K.4. Evalua tio n C ri t eri a............................................ 79 Statement.................................................... 79 Plan R e f e r e nc e............................................... 80 E val u a t i o n................................................... 80 K.5.a. Ev alu at io n C ri t e ria............................................ 80 Statement.................................................... 80 Pla n R e f e r e n c e............................................... 81 l E v al u a t i o n................................................... 81 1 K.5.b. Ev alu a ti o n C ri t e ri a............................................. 81 Statement.................................................... 81 Plan R e f e r e nc e............................................... 81 Ev al u a t i o n................................................... 81 I vill lu_____.______

~ ._v, .w~. 3 J eMay 1988

m.

CONTENTS (Cont'd)

L.

- Medli and Public Health Support (Planning Standard L);.....'.............. '82 L.I. Evalua t io n C rit e ria............................................ 82 S t a t e m e nt........................... 82 Plan R e f e r e nc e '................................................ 82- ' Ev al u a t i o n................................................... 82 ' L.'3. Evalua t io n C ri t e ri a.............'....... '......................... 83 S t a t e m e n t..................................................... 83 Pl an R e f e r e n c e...... '....................................... 83 83-Evaluat io n.............,............... L.4. - Eval u a ti o n' C elt e ri a............................................ 83 . S t at e m e n t'............ f....................................... 83' A Pla n ' R e f e r e n c e............................................... 83 Ev al u a t i o n................................................... 83 W M. Recovery and Reentry Planning and Postaccident Operations (Plan ning S t andard M ).................................................. 84 M.1. Evalua t io n C rit e ria............................................. 84~ S t a t e m e n t ~.................................................... 84 Plan R e f e r e nc e............................................... 84 E val u a t io n................................................... 84 M.3. Evalua tio n C ri t e ria............................................ 84 Statement.................................................... 85 Plan R e f e re nc e............................................... 85 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 85 n M.4. E valuat io n C ri t e r ia............................................ J5 Statement................................................... 85 Plan) Reference............................................... 85 Ev al u a t io n................................................... 85 N. Exercises and Drills (Planning Standard N)................................ 86 N.1.a. Evaluation Crit e ria............................................ 86 Statement.................................................... 86 -{ Plan R e f e re nc e............................................... 86 E valua t io n................................................... 86 N.1.b. Evaluation Crit eria............................................ 86 Statement.................................................... 87 Plan R e f e r e nc e............................................... 87 Eval ua t io n................................................... 87 N.2. Evaluatio n Crit eria............................................ 87 .LE

n^,f if i y',n ? i M .j, -. ; "i }if i ( y 3 yy 9 - a' May 1988, w, t. s g o. ' CONTENTS (Cont'd) f - N.2.a. ' ~ Co m munic a tion Drills.......................................... 88 -Statement.................................................... 88 y*. Plan R e f e r e nc e............................................... 88 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 88-N.2.c. .Evalua tion' C rit e ria............................................ 88. Statement..................................................... 89 ~ . Plan R e f e r e n c e..........................'..................... 89 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 89 N.2.d... Ev alu a tio n C rit e ria............................................ 89 u1 . Statement.................................................... 89 Plan ' R e f e r e n c e.................,,..,......................... ' 90 E v al u a t i o n........... s........................................ - 90 ~ N.2.e. E valu a t io n C ri t e ria............................................ 90 q Statement.................................................... 90 Plan R e f ere nc e............................................... 90 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 90 N.3. - Evalu a tio n C rit e ria. '........................................... 90 r N.3.a. ' Statement'.......'.............................................. 91 H. Pla n R e f e r e nc e............................................... '91 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 91 J N.3.b. Ev alua tion C rit e ria............................................ 91 1 Statement.................................................... 91 Plan R e f e re n c e............................................... 91 c E v al ua t io n................................................... 91 ) N.3.c. Evalu a t io n C ri t e ria............................................ 91 j Statement.................................................... 91 1 Plan R e f e r e n c e............................................... 92 E v al u a : M n................................................... 92 ~ N.3.d. Evaluation C rit eria............................................ 92 ) Statement.................................................... 92 Plan R e f e re n c e............................................... 92 Ev alua t ion................................................... 92 N.3.e. Enl 1 tion C rite ria............................................ 92 92 y c ;e a.ent., P lan R e f er e nc e............................................... 93 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 93 N.3.f. Evaluation Criteria............................................ 93 Statement.................................................... 93 Plan R e f e re nc e............................................... 93 Ev alua t io n................................................... 93 x

h a., m4 L Ks May 1938. L V CONTENTS (Cont'd) N.4. Ev alua tio n C rit e ria................. '........................... 9 3 -- - S t a t e m e n t '.. '.........'.......................................... 94 Plan R e f er e n c e............................................... '94 E v al u a t i o n..................................................... 94 N.5. ~ Ev alu a t io n C hi t e ri c.......... '.................................. .94 Statement................................................... 94

Plan R e f e r e n c e...............................................

95' E v al u a t i o n '................................................... 95 N.6. Evalua tio n C riteria............................................ 95 Statement....'................................................ 95 Plan R e f e re n c e '............................................... 95 E v al u a t i o n...........,........................................ 95-C. Radiological Emergency Response Training (Planning Standard O)............ 96 E valu a tio n C ri t e ri a............................................ 96 . O.1.. Statement.................................................... 96 P lan R e f e r e n c e..... '.......................................... 96 Ev alu a t i o n................................................... 96 0.4. ' Evalu a t io n C ri t e ri a............................................ 97 O.4.a.. Statement.................................................... 97 P lan R e f e r e n c e............................................... 97 - E v al u a t i o n................................................... 97 O.4.b. Evalua tio n C rit e ri a............................................ 97 Statement.................................................... 97 Plan R e f e re nc e '............................................... - 98 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 98

0. 4.c.

Evaluatio n Criteria............................................ 98 Statement.................................................... 98 Plan R e f e r e n c e............................................... 99 Ev alua t i o n................................................... 99 0.4.d. Evaluation Criteria............................................ 99 S ta t e m e n t.................................................... 99 Plan R e f e r e n c e............................................... 99 = E v al u a t i o n................................................... 99 0.4.f. Evaluation Criteria............................................ 100 Statement.................................................... 100 Plan R e f e r e n c e............................................... 100 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 100 l e Ei

W .May'1938 x i CONTENTS (Cont'd) o Js O.4.g. Evalua tio n C rit eri a............................................ 100 D Statement................................................... 100 P l an R e f e r e n c e -............................................... 100 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 100 O.4.h. Eva.lu a tio n C ri t e ria............................................ 101 Statement.................................................... 101 Plan R e f e re nc e............................................... 101 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 101 0.4.J. E v aluat i o n C ri t e ri a............................................ 101: Statement.................................................... 101 Plan R e f e re n c e............................................... 102 E v al u a t i o n.......... f........................................ 102 0.4.k. E valu a t io n C ri t e ri a............................................ 102 Statement.................................................... 102 Plan R e f e r e n c e............................................... 102 o E v al u a t i o n................................................... - 102 1 0.5. Evalu a t io n Cri t er ia............................................ 102 Statement.................................................... 103 Pla n R e f e r e n c e............................................... 103 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 103 O.6. E valu a t io n C ri t e ri a............................................ 103 Statement.................................................... 103 Pl a n R e f e r e n c e............................................... 103 Ev alu a t i o n................................................... 103 P. - Responsibility for the Planning Effort: Development, Periodic Review and Distribution of Emergency Plans (Planning Standard P).................. 104 P.1. Evaluation Criteria............................................ 104 Statement.................................................... 104 Plan ) Reference............................................... 104 Ev alu a t i o n................................................... 104 1 P.2. Evaluation Criteria............................................ 104 Statement.................................................... 104 Plan R e f ere n c e............................................... 104 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 105 P.3. Evalu a tio n C ri t e ria............................................ 105 Statement.................................................... 105 Plan R e f e re n c e............................................... 105 Eval u a t i o n................................................... 105 P.4. Evalu a tio n C ri t e ria............................................ 105 Statement.................................................... 105 P l an R e f e r e n c e............................................... 105 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 106 111

. m sp ii s t ,L - t~ i 9 May 1988-l L f o-1 3 , y CONTENTS (Cont'd) ~P.S., Evaluation C riteria............................................ ' 10 6 ' Statement................................................... 106 Pl an R e f er e n c e... '............................................ 106 L E v al u a t i o n................................................... 106 P.6., . Evalu a t io n Cri t e r i a............................................ 106 -Statement.................................................... 106 Pl a n R e f er e n c e............................................... 106 E v al u a t i o n................................................... 107 P.7. . Evalu a tio n C rit eria '............................................ - 107-Statement.................................................... 107 b Plan Reference '........................ 4 107 E v al u a t i o n..........,........................................ 107-i P.8.

Evaluation C rit e ria............................................ 107 Statement....................................................

107 Plan R e f er e nc e............................................... 10 7 i - E v alu a t i o n................................................... 107 i P.10.' - Ev alu a t io n C ri t e ri a............................................ 108 Statement.................................................... 108 P lan R e f e re nc e............................................... 108-E v al u a t i o n................................................... 108- .P.11. ' Evalu a tio n C rit e ria............................................ 108 Statement.................................................... 108 PlanReference................................................ 108 . Ev al u a t io n................................................... 108 Plan 'R evie w R a ting Su m m ary............................................... 109 APPENDIX A: FEMA-REP-11 Review and Evaluation of Seabrook Public Education Materials t. 1111

May 1933 i i REVIEW AND EVALUATION OF i SEABROOK PLAN AND PREPAREDNESS j l FOR MASSACHUSETTS COMMUNITIES j l BACKGROUND This review was conducted by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region I (FEMA !), with the assistance of the Regional Assistance Committee (RAC). j The RAC is chaired Ly FEMA and has the following members: Nuclear Regulatory j Commission; U.S. Department of Agriculture; U.S. Department of Commerce; U.S. Department of Energy; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI); U.S. Department of Transportation; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; U.S. Food and Drug Administration; and the U.S. Public Health Service. The j Regional Assistance Committee functions in accordance with 44 CFR, Part 351, l " Radiological Emergency Response Pldning and Response." ) The " Review and Approval of State and local Radiological Emergency Plans and Preparedness," 44 CFR 350, specifies that the criteria and objectives used in the Review 1 will be those deuiled in NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1, November 1980. FEMA's rule 44 CFR 350 established the procedures and policies for FEMA's review, evaluation and approval of State and local government radiological emergency planning and preparedness for commercial nuclear power plants. On November 3,1987, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) amended its rules to provide criteria for the evaluation of utility prepared emergency plans in situations in which state and/or local governments decline to participate further in emergency planning. On December 2,1987, FEMA and the NRC promulgated an interim-use dccument entitled " Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants (Criteria for Utility Offsite Planning and Preparedness)". The document has been published as Supplement I to NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1. The guidance contained in Supplement 1 is to be used for the development, review and evaluation of offsite utility radiological planning and preparedness for accidents at commercial nuclear power plants. FEMA utilizes the "350 process" established in the FEMA rule,44 CFR 350, for reviewing and evaluating State and local radiological emergency preparedness for commercial nuclear power plants. There are two different types of FEMA findings under the 350 process, "350 finding" and " Interim findings". There are differences between the two types of findings. First, the authority under the "350 finding"is 44 CFR 350 and the authority under the " interim finding" is provided under 44 CFR 350 and by the FEMA /NRC Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), April 18, 1985. Under the MOU, the NRC can request an interim finding on the adequacy of offsite planning and preparedness. Even though these differences do exist,350 and inte'im findings are part of the same FEMA review and evaluation process. This FEMA review and evaluation used NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1, Supp.1, November 1987, as the basis (planning j standards and specific criteria) for determining the adequacy of the New Hampshire ] Yankee Seabrook Plan and Preparedness for Massachusetts Communities. FEMA I riv

W f R $ x,o Mqg May 1988.' e 3 g W[ Guidance. Memoranda' (GM) and. FEMA REP-series documents were utilized to interpret, (clarify, and evaluate the criteria contained in Supplement 1. a fx INTRODUCTION - Following is a' summary of the material that has been submitted to FEMA for review 'and evaluation: . On. September 18,'.1987, the Public Service.of New Hampshire, New Hampshire g" ~. Yankee (NHY), su'omitted to the NRC Revision 0 of the "Seabrook Plan for Massachusetts Communities," hereafter referred to as the Plan. The Plan consisted of 10 volumes.~ The volumes i are as. follows: Plan; Procedures;' Plan Appendixes i through G; Plan ~ Appendix H Plan Appendix I; Plan Appendix J; Plan Appendix K; han Appendix L; Plan Appendix M;' Plan Appendix N;' and u6e envelope with Public Information Materials. It should.be noted thht certain proprietary information was redacted from the submitted

material, i

f On November-27,1987,. the NRC forwarded the Plan to FEMA. Under provisions J 'of the. FEMA /NRC MOU,' the NRC requested FEMA to review the Plan and provide { . findings (interim finding). The NRC requested that FEMA utilize the Supplement 1 .j terit'eria document as the basis for FEMA's review, evaluation, and FEMA findings. ,: On December 2,1987, the NRC supplemented its November 27,1987 request to . FEMA. The NRC requested FEMA to use the following assumption in reviewing and evaluating the Plan: FEMA should assume that in an actual radiological emergency, F State and local officials that have declined to participate in emergency planning will: . exercise their best efforts to protect the health and safety of the public; cooperate with ' the-utility and follow. the utility offsite plan; and have the resources sufficient to implement those portions of the utility offsite plan where State and local response is necessary. On December 18, 1987, NHY wrote the NRC, stating, that NHY expected NRC and FEMA to utilize Supplement 1 interim criteria document for the Federal review and evaluation.. On December 30, 1987, NHY provided to the NRC certain information that was j redacted from Revision 0 of the Plan. ] l On December 30, 1987, FEMA Region I requested the Regional Assistance ] Committee (RAC) and the FEMA staff to review the Plan. FEMA Region I designated ) Mr. Richard W. Donovan ~to serve as the RAC Chairman and to serve as the FEMA staff for the review and evaluation of the Plan. On -January 7,1988 the Deputy Assistant General Counsel for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission notified interest parties that the Alerting System (sirens in the plume EPZ portion of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts) described in the Plan will no longer be relied upon by NHY. xv

May 1988 l On January 15, 1988, the RAC Chairman for the Review of the Plan requested j that,the FEMA Region i RAC utilize Supplement I for their review. The RAC Chairman j informed the RAC that the following assumptions were to be applied to the review and evaluation' of the Plan: in an actual radiological emergency, State and local officials that have declined to participate in emergency planning will: exercise their best efforts to protect the health and safety of the public; cooperate with the utility and follow the utility offsite plan; and have the resources sufficient to implement those portions of the { utility offsite plan where State and local response is necessary. 1 On February 12, 1988, the Public Service Company of New Hampshire, New hmpshire Yankee Division, provided additional information in response to the NRC letter, dated February 5,1988. The following information was provided: Seabrook Station Evacuation Time Estimates and Traffic Management Plan; Documentation on the Seabrook MET PAC Computer Software Package in the back up HP-41 CX Calculato. j EPROM System (these systems provide the means to evaluate the consequences of an off-site radioactive airborne release / Summary of the NHY ORO Training classes, dated ) 2/8/88; the draft Farmers Brochure," Emergency Information for Farmers," and a copy of l the existing MA Dept. of Agriculture's Farmers Brochure; a copy of the Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratory Procedures and a copy of the Yankee Mutual Assistance Plan; NHY ORO lesson plans as referenced in Section 7.6 of the Pira; status report on preparedness efforts for Special Populations in the Massachusetts Communities; and a status report on congregate care facilities /American Red Cross. On February 16, 1988, the Public Service Company of New Hampshire, New ' Hampshire Yankee Division, provided plan updates, referred to as Amendment 1. On February 19, 1988, the Public Service Company of New Hampshire, New Hampshire Yankee Division, provided plan updates, referred to as Amendment 2. On April 1, 1988, the Public Service Company of New Hampshire, New i Hampshire Yankee Division, provided plan updates, referred to as Amendraent 3. On April 14, 1988, the Public Service Company of New Hampshire, New Hampshire Yankee Division, provided plan updates, referred to as Amendment 4. / i REVIEW SPECIFICS The review and evaluation of the Seabrook Plan and Preparedness for Massachusetts Communities is attached. The format is a repeat of the planning standard and specific criteria of NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1, Supp. #1, followed by a statement, Plans and Procedures reference, and an evaluation section. The evaluation section contains an evaluation which will be one of the following: 1. " Adequate" 2. " Inadequate" 3. " Adequate /Not Applicable" xvi

L w 4, May 1998 [h 3.. The evaluation of criteria elet. tent G.1 (public information material) was inade in accordance with "A Guide to Preparing Emergency Public Information Materials," FEMA-REP-11 (June 1987)., FEMA-REP-11 became official FEMA guidance for such evaluations pursuant to a July-10, 1987 memorandum to all Regional Directors from'the Deputy Associate Director,; State : and Local Programs and. Support Directorate, entitled " Regional Periodic Review of REP Public Information Material." n .The following assumption as applied to the review and evaluation of the Seabrook Plan ~ and Preparedness for Massachusetts Communities: in an.-actual radiological emergency, State and local' officials that have declined.to participate in emergency. planning will exercise their best efforts to protect the health and safety of the public; cooperate with'the utility and follow the Utility Offsite Plan; and have the resources sufficient to implement those portions of the. utility Offsite Plan where State and local-I response is necessary.. y I

, q;p: Y, f'jg l m,llhti_ bif. %.. W i-Vtv F* ih.V Y;Q, ' t

G g

'y,% /f May 1988 s n ~ g_ o M ACRONYMS ~ The ko owing acronyms'are used. ACP-[ , -(Access Control Point b A MS.' ' ! At rial-Measuring System L ARAC h.m jAtmo' spheric Release Advisory Capability ARC:

cAmerican Red Cross l

'BNLL Brookhaven National Laboratory - g (CDC) . Center for Disease ' Control CPM: Counts per minute-

i;'>

s .TU.' I Department of Commerce- . DOC)"' S 1DOD

U.S2 Department'of Defense.

DOE. , U.S. Department of Energy DOI c (U.STDepartment of the Interior DOT: U.S. Department of Transportation DRD- ,, Direct-Reading Dosimeter EAL: L Emergency' Action Level ?EBS:

Emergency Broadcast System

s. ECL)

Emergency Classification Level EMS' - Emergency Medical Services EMT Emergency Medical Technician EO.C i . Emergency Operations Center EOF-LEmergency Operations Facility .EPAL U.S.' Environmental Protection Agency ERPA Emergency Response Planning Area L a: ETE: Evacuation Time Estimate study EPZ-Emergency Planning Zone ,EWF. Emergency Worker Facility FAA Federal Aviation Administration FDA: U.S. Food and Drug Administration FEMAi Federal Emergency Management Agency FRC Federal Response Center FRERP. Federal Radiological Emergency Response Plan y.

FRMAP.

Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Plan '(formerly IRAP -Interagency Radiological Assistance Plan), DOE GE' General Emergency HHS U.S. Department of Health and Human Services HUD Department of Housing and Urban Development _-_-_-__.___2_--

c s May 1988-

IPc implementing Procedure IFO Incident Field Office -

i. 1JCAH - Joint Committee on Accreditation of Hospitals K! Potassium lodide c MAGI - Massachusetts Governmental Interface- -METS Melita Emergency Telenotification System - MCDA/OEP Massachusetts Civil Defense Agency / Office of Emergency Preparedness MDPH' Massachusetts Department of Public Health MREM Millirem j p NAS-Nuclear Alert System ~NCRP National Council on Rad 5 tion Protection and Measurements l> NCS National Communications System i NESPERN Northern Essex County Police ~ Emergency Radio Network - -{ ' NEST-Nuclear Emergency Search Team l NHY t New Hampshire Yankee: NHY ORO : New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Organization NIAT Nuclear Incident Advisory Team NMCCL National Military Command Center NMFS. National Marine Fisheries Service NOAA- - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOUE Notification of Un~ usual Event 'NRC - Nuclear Regulatory Commission L PA Protective Action -PAG Protective Action Guide , PAR Protective Action Recommendation PNS-Prompt Notification System PSNH ' Public Service of New Hampshire ] R Roentgen RACES Radio Amateur Communications Emergency Services q REM 1 Roentgen Equivalent Man RERP-Radiological Emergency Response Plan RETCO Pegional Emergency Transportation Coordinators ] RPU Remote Programming Unit i I SA Stag!ng Area SAE Site f.rea Emergency TCP Traffic Control Point TLD Thermoluminescent Dosimeter ] TMI Three Mile Island TP Transfer Point .TSC. Technical Support Center EiE

n, ...V s '1 o 'm: 2q;- g' o,. ; ; ; ,r c i., .q, ,fj + < r J.' : .May.'1930' ','. .j JW 1 .y c, L a ~ 7 4 kUSAFf - U.Si Air Force - e

"USCG -

U.S. Coast Guard : 9 q _v ' i l ~' f ' USD A -: .U.S. Department o Agr cu ture 'USGS' 'U.S. Geologic Survey; ~ y. ' WS! ' ' Weather Service-International ' Yankee Atomic Electric Company. i YAEC: g.g .N k ee' l l 'i e Y U

-_2 2.-.

t 2 1 May 1938 PLANNING STANDARDS AND EVALUATION CRITERIA A. Assignment of. Responsibility (Organization Control) (Planning Standard A): Primary responsibilities for emergency response by the nuclear facility licensee, and by State and local organizations within the Emergency Planning Zones have been assigned, the emergency responsibilities of the various supporting organizations have l, been specifically established, and each principal response'ergani::ation has staff to respond and to augment its initial response on a continuous basis. l Evaluation Criteria 'A.1.a. The offsite plan shalb, identify the elements of the offsite response organization for Emergency Planning Zones (see Appendix 5 of NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1).1 Statement t.. A.1.a. The Plan (Table 2.0-1) defines the offsite response organization as including the' New Hampshire Yankee Offsite Response Organization (NHY ORO), supported by the U.S. Coast Guard, the DOI, the Federal Aviation Administration,' the American Red

Cross, and various private organizations.

Although Table 2.0-1 Indicates that NHY ORO communicates with the USCG and the FAA, the Plan states in Section 3.1 that "[r]equests to the U.S. Coast Guard and Federal Aviation Administration will be coordinated through the host state for Seabrook, l New. Hampshire." The Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the City of i Newburyport, and the Towns of Amesbury, Merrimac, Newbury, Salisbury, and West Newbury are not currently participating in emergency planning { for Seabrook Station. The Plan includes the American Red Cross as a participating organization and the Red Cross has stated in a letter to NHY dated September 10, 1987 that it will respond in case of an emergency. However, a discussion on February 23, 1988 between FEMA staff and Red Cross Southern New England Temporary Staff indicated that the Red Cross is not presently participating in this planning process. The Plan has been developed in recognition of, and to compensate for the fact that the ) Commonwealth of Massachusetts and above mentioned local communities { are not cuantly participating in emergency planning for the Seabrook ( Station.. Portions of the State of New Hampshire and the Commonwealth IOffsite response organization is defined as the utility offsite emergency response ) organization along with other participating voluntary and private organizations, and i local, State and Federal governments engaging in the development of offsite emergency plans for a nuclear power plant.

fW{ ' 4 -p.. 1 - l' i 2 May 1988 of Massachusetts are situated within the plume exposure EPZ. Portions of the State of New Hampshire, the State'of Maine, and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts are situated within the ingestion exposure EPZ. - Plan Reference A.1.a. Section 1.0; Section 2.1; Section 2.2; Section 2.3; Section 2.4; Section 2.5; Siction 3.1; Figure 1.3-1; Figure 1.3-2; Table 2.0-1; and Table 2.3-1. ' Evaluation A.1.a. : Adequate. Evaluation Criteria A.1.b. ; The offsite response organization shall specify its concept of operations, and its relationship to the total effort. The concept of operation will explain how ' the offsite response organization' will function with non-participating State and. local governments, and will specify the' various modes of operation. Statement A.1.b. The NHY ORO concept of operations' discussion is discussed in section 3.1 . of the Plan. A flow chart, Figure 3.1-1, dep'fets how the NHY ORO will function - with nonparticipating Commonwealth and local governments i during a radiological emergency. The Plan states that the NHY ORO will function in one of three Modes. Following is a brief description of the three modes: 1 Standby Mode - Standby and continue eccident assessment and monitor State / local response; Mode 1 - Supplies needed resources only; I Mode 2 - Implements specific authorized actions, supplies any needed a resources, integrates response into State / local response; or takes control. Integrates NHY, State, local, and Federal Response into Seabrook Plan for Massachusetts Communities. L Plan Reference 'A.I.b. Section 3.1 and Figure 3.1-1. I _ = = _ _ _ - _ - _

p j77 7-- ,7 ,p s s x gay 1933' '.@3 -

lr q

j j Evaluation

J' f

T ! A.1'b.c Adequate. Evaluation Criteria.

{

c i ( ' A.1.c.i ( The.offsite. plan shallj illustrate L these : interrelationships Din a: block - / diagram.1 : This1 diagram iwillfdefine the roles for the offsite response organization andi non-participating State - and' local governments, andi 'identifyLthe lead interf aces. q ' 3tatement 4 A.1.c. The_ relationships iAtween the NHY ORO, the participating organizations, and :the.' nonparticipating organizations are illustrated in Figure 2.0-1.- - Personnel assigned to each NHY ORO position in the NHY ORO are set out- - in Figure 2.1-1. The lead interfaces between the NHY ORO and- - nonparticipating. Commonwealth and local governments are summarized in Table 2.2-1 and Table 2.2-2. Plan Reference A.1.c. . Section 2.0; Section 2.1; Section 2.2; Figure 2.0-1; Table 2.2-1; and Table 2.2-2. Evaluation. A.1.c. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria A.1.d. The offsite respoue' organization shall identify a specifle individual by title who shall be in charga of the emergency response. .4 Statement A.I.d. IP 1.1-describes the actions for the NHY ORO Offsite Response Dieector and Assistants in the event of an emergency at Seabrook Station. The Offsite Response Director (ORD) is responsible for d'recting the NHY ORO Response Organization in Massachusetts. The Offsite Response Director responsibilities include the followings working with the Governors I

py I 4' May 1938 l-t . of New Hampshire and Massachusetts; working with the Seabrook Station Director; determining protective action. recommendations (PARS) for- . Massachusetts; obtaining approval from Governor of Massachusetts to. = implement ' pas and response activities in Massachusetts; issuing public 'information material concerning response ' activities;. approving exposures greater than 25 rem for NHY ORO personnel only; committing resources from' New Hampshire Yankee, and requesting Federal. Assistance and 4 . working with1 FEMA.' There are two NHY Assistant.Offsite Response a- . Directors for each shif t. One is responsible for implementing pas. The other is responsible for providing communications between NHY ORO and the various Federal and state organizations and the utility. In the event: the Offsite Response Director has to leave the ' facility, one of.the Assistant Offsite Response Directors will act as Offsite Response Director.- . The-Offsite Rysponse D! rector is~ responsible for supervising 'six subordinates- (Fig. 2.1-1).- of IP 1.1 (Federal Support Coordination) addresses the interfaces with the various Federal agencies. of IP 1.1 (Condition Response Activities) addresses the interfaces with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the six local Massachusetts communities, the State of New Hampshire, and Seabrook-Station. Attachment 3 of IP 1.1 addresses the ongoing activities of the Offsite Response Director and describes the management style of the' Offsite Response Director. The management style calls for a briefing by. key staff following each change in classification (ECL) and each PAR and PA. Plan Reference A.I.d. Section 2.1; Section 3.1; and IP 1.1. Evaluation l A.1.d. Adequate. ' Evaluation Criteria A.1.e. The offsite response organization shall provide for 24-hour per day emergency response, including 24-hour per day staffing of communications links. Statement A.1.e. NHY ORO states that it is structured for and capable of providing and maintaining 24-hour staffing for a protracted emergency. The l

= -l 5 May 1938 .e , communications link between Seabrook Station and the NHY ORO is designated as the NHY ORO EOC Contact Point, which is staffed on a 24- . hour basis.. Plan Reference A.I.e. Section 2.1.1; Section 3.2.1; Section 3.2.2; and IP 2.1. Evaluation. 4 A.1.e. Adequate. . Evaluation Criteria A.2.a. .The offsite ' response. organization shall. specify the functions and responsibilities for major elements and key individuals by title, of emergency response, including the following: Command and Control, Alerting and Notification, Communications, Public Information, Accident Assessment, Public Health and Sanitation, Social Services, Fire and Rescue, Traffic Control, Emergency Medical Services,. Law Enforcement, Transportation, Protective Response (including authority to request Federal assistance and to initiate other protective actions), and Radiological Exposure Control. The description of these functions shall include a clear and concise ' summary such as a table of primary and support responsibilities using the agency as one axis, and the function as the other. This description shall specify those functions which require State and local authorization before implementing, such as: . i. l Directing traffic;

11. Blocking roadways, erecting barriers in roadways and channeling traffic; 111. Posting traffic signs on roadways; iv. Removing obstructions from public roadways, including towing vehicles; Activating sirens and directing the broadcasting of EBS messages; v.

vi. Making decisions and recommendations to the public concerning protective actions for the plume exposure pathway; vii. Making decisions and recommendations to the pub!!c concerning protective actions for the ingestion exposure pathway;

y ,; 9; ~~ - ~ ~ ~ ~

. O IUM s

II k s M 2 ,[ .ay 1988.. 6. ~ g ,,n viii.~ Making decisions and recommendations to the. public. concerning [n y. recovery and reentry; ix. Dispensing fuel from tank trucks to automobiles along roadsides; 3 ,m h Ex. Performing access control at an EOC, relocation centers and the EPZ perimeters; an'd U The offsite plan shall also identify similar functions and responsibilities'and J n' interfaces for an anticipated State and local response to an emergency. . Statement 9' A.2.a.: The NHY.ORO emergency response functions and responsibilities for key individuals are specified in Table 2.0-1. The functions include command and control,' communications, Notifications,. public/ alerting; public -information, accident assessment, shelter-in-place, evacuation,' access and traffic control, food, water and milk control, radiological exposure control, emergency medical services, congregate l care, law enforcement, fire and rescue, public health and' sanitation, and reentry and recovery. We find Table 2.0-1 to be incomplete and inadequate:. the DOI is not !!sted as a - Federal response agency, and the USCG and'FAA are not listed as being.. assigned the primary responsibility assigned them in the concept of f~ operations. We could not locate the functions of social. services and transportation. Tables 2.2-1, 2.2-2, 2.3-1, in Section 2, Indicate the primary and support responsibilities for NHY ORO, Commonwealth, local, Federal, and private organizations. cf IP 2.14 includes textual descriptions of the functions which require Commonwealth and local authorization before implementation. Plan Reference A.2.a. Section 2.1.1; Table 2.0-1; Table 2.2-1; Table 2.2-2 Table 2.3-1; and IP 2.14. Evaluation A.2.a. . Adequate. We recommend that Table 2.0-1 be revised to include the DOI and to include the primary responsibility designations for the DOI, USCG, and FAA.

V ;"f;h f*p 7% l3, t 1 $W' 7 Mayfl988 z ,s ( l y, l[ ' Evaluation Crit' ria. e 1 m aL J A.2.b.- ;The offsite plan shall contain where applicable l(by reference to'specifici ' acts, codes or statutes) the legal basis for such authorities including those u 4 that reserve functions to' State and local governments. L l . Statement :- E Thel Plan identifies the legal authorities regarding the involvement of the K 4 L A.2.b.; Commonwealth.of : Massachusetts. in. plans and L preparedness for a. radiological emergency at a'commercia.l nuclear power plant. The' Plan identifies the Federal regulation regarding the involvement of NHY ORO in . plans and preparedness for, a radiological' emergency. at a radiological

emergency at a commercial nuclear power plant.

v. . Plan Reference a .A.2.b. Section 1.2. Evaluatio'n ' A.2.b. -Adequate. Evaluation Criteria. A. 3. - . The offsite plan shall include written agreements referring to the concept-of operations developed between Federal agencies, the offsite response organization,. and other support ~ organizations having an emergency response role within the Emergency Planning Zones. The agreements shall identify the emergency measures to be provided and the mutually acceptable criteria for their implementation, and specify the arrangements for exchange? of information. These agreements may be provided in an. appendix to the offsite plan or. the offsite plan itself may contain. descriptions of these matters and a signature page in the offsite plan may serve to verify the agreements. The signature page format is appropriate for organizations where response functions are covered by laws, regulations or executive orders where separate written agreements are not necessary. Statement I A.3. NHY and the State of New Hampshire have executed a Letter of Agreement "to establish radiological emergency preparedness notification l and response." It specifies concepts of operation between the two j I 1

i 8 M:y,1988 regarding alert and notification,' exchanges of information,' evaluation and i Implementation of precautionary actions for. special populations, ace! dent j assessment measures for both the plume and ingestion exposure EPZs, and l the coordination of public information and rumor. control activities. -) Specific lead functions ' are assigned to the State of _ New Hampshire J concerning the notification and coordination of emergency activities.with the State of Maine, the,USCG, the FAA, and the Boston and Maine railroad. _ The USCG has signed a ' Memorandum of Understanding with the - State of New Hampshire to provide control, notification, and restriction of' waterborne traffic. The NHY 'ORO will commur.!cate directly with the DOI. We could not locate an agreement with the DO!. See statements under E.6 and J.9. We could not locate the Yankee Atomic Mutual Assistance Plan, e .i Plan Reference A.3. Section 3.1; Section 7.2.2; and Appendix C. Evaluation A.3. Inadequate. There is one remaining agreement to be developed. Meetings and discussions are ongoing between NHY and DO!. We could not locate the Yankee Atomic Mutual Assistance Plan. Evaluation Criteria A.4. The offsite response organization shall be capable of continuous (24-hour) operations for a protN.eted period. The individual in the offsite response organization who will be responsible for assuring continuity of resources (technical, administrative, and material) shall be specified by title. I Statement i l A.4. The NHY ORO states that it is capable of providing and maintaining a continuous (24 hour) staffing for a protracted emergency. Two shifts of personnel have been designated for most positions. Figure 2.1-1 summarizes the various positions and numbers assigned to each function. The Support Services Coordinator it, responsible for procurement of The Plan j manpower and resources to support the emergency response. states (Section 2.1.1) that certain evacuation related positions, es f h __ __ _ _ a

g-,, .m , ~. -

g..

[j; ~;;; - 7" : 9 Hay'1988 h :x;l $; y;, (; h,- ~?t k ' !dentified (in' Figure 2.1-1, only require one 'shif t. In addition, the' Plan . provides 'a-20% staffi.g cushion for the single-shift positions.to account for.~ ^ ^ i those who might be unavailable at kny particular time. f$ e i Plan Reference ~ l,. A.4.> Section 2.1.1 and Figure 2.1-1. j;o Evaluation y . ' Ade quat'e. .A.4. s j. i e l l A + 0 l j

y 10 May 1908 x l ~ C. Emergency Response Support and Resources (Planning Standard C):. Arrangements for requesting and effectively using assistance resources have been .made, arrangements to accommodate State and local staff at the licensee's near-site ' Emergency Operations Facility have been made, and other organizations capable of-augmenting the planned response have been identified. Evaluation Criteria C.I. The Federal government maintains in-depth capability to assist licensees, Staes and local governments through the Federal' Radiological Emergency. Response Plan. Each offsite response organization and licensee shall make provisions for _ incorporating the" Federal response capability into its operations plan, including the following: p-C.I.a. specif persons by title authorized to request Federal assistance; see i A.1.d, A.2.a; Statement - C.1.a. The New Hsmpshire Yankee Offsite Response Director through the Assistant Offsite Response Director is specified to request Federsi f Assistance. Plan Reference C.I.a. Section 2.3.2. Evaluation C.I.a. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria C.1.b. specific Federal resources expected, including expected times of arrival at specific nuclear facility sites; and Statement C.1.b. Specific times of arrival and expected resources for each Federal response organization are estimated to be between three and eight hours for the lead Federal response agencies. i

my, = l };; (q i \\ H $ 11 May 1988-f .( Plan Reference j 'i C.1.b. - -- Section 2.3 and Table 2.3-2. 1 1 - Evaluation .C.1.b. ~ Adequate.- Evaluation Criteria C.1.c. specific licensee and offsite response organization resources available to - support the Federal response, e.g., air fields, command posts, telephone-J I lines, radio frequencies and telecommunications centers. Statement ~C.1.c. .The Plan lists a number of airports available for Federal use. Space and . telephone. lines have been designated for FEMA and NRC in the NHY ORO EOC and Media Center. The Support Services Coordinator is responsible for identifying logistical support for the Federal Response effort. We could not" determine if. FEMA has designated a FRC location, or if the Department of Energy.has designated a FRMAC. Plan Reference C.1.c. .Section 2.1; Section 2.3.2; and Section 5.4. Evaluation i C.1.c. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria C.2.a. The offsite response organization may dispatch representatives to the licensee's near-site Emergency Operations Facility. (Technical analysis representatives at the near-site EOF are preferred.) Statement C.2.a. The NHY ORO EOC and the Seabrook Station EOF are located within the same facility. Key interfaces for these two organizations occur between the Seabrook Station Response Manager and the NHY Offsite Response t

g-f' ~ 12L h Mey-193S' O Director (which can 'be via the NHY ORO Technical Advisor) and between the Seabrook Station' EOF Coordinator and the NHY ORO Assistant Offsite L> Response Director, Support Liaison. Plan Reference a C.2.a. Section 2.1; Section 5.-1; an'd Section 5.2. o Evaluation C.2.a. Adequate. .o ' Evaluation Criteria C.2.b. The !kensee shall prepare for the dispatch of representatives to the offsite - response orgdzation's emergency operations center and ~ to principal emergency operations centers of participating and non-participating governments. Statement i, C.2.b. The Seabrook Station EOF and the NHY ORO EOC are located in the same ' f acility. Primary interfaces between these organizations are discussed in C.2.a. above. The Seabrook Station Response Manager provides plant data (via the Technical Advisor), accident assessnient, and protective action recommendations to the NHY Offsite Response Director, who in turn provides this informat!on to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and local government organizations through his liaisons. Plan Reference l C.2.b. Section 5.1 and Section 5.2. Evaluation C.2.b.- Adequate. Evaluation Criteria l C.2.c. The offsite response organization shall prepare for the dispatch of a representative to principal offsite governmental emergency operations centers.

m q: m 13: 'May 1988-pwe N -j. s'tatement - C.2.c. < For directing and coordinating the liaison and' communication effort ~offsite governmental EOCs, the NHY ORO plans to dispatch Loca to each of the six local EPZ communities. The Local Liaisons report to local community EOC when authorized by the community town official. "? NHY ORO also plans to dispatch a School Liaison and a Special Po Liaison to each local community EOC.. ,u -NHY ORO plans.to dispatch three State Liaisons: one to the Common-wealth of Massachusetts at the State EOC in Framingham, one to the Ar ! EOC in Tewksbury, and one to the Massachusetts Department of Pu Health (MDPH) Radiation Control Office in Boston. Plan Reference C.2.c. IP 1.8; IP 1.9; IP 1.10; and IP 1.11. ' Evaluation C.2.c. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria C.3. The offsite response organization shall identify radiological laboratories and their general capabilities and expected availability to provide radiological monitoring and analyses services which can be used in an emergency. j i l Statement C.3. The Plan identifies a radiological laboratory (with multiple facilities), and lts general capabilities and expected availability for analysis service. Air } { sample cartridges and particulate filters are to be delivered to the Seabrook Station EOF in Newington, New Hampshire, where they are to b1 analyzed for radiolodine and particulate by personnel and equipment from Yankee Atomic Electric Company. A mobile laboratory equipment van (belonging to the Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratory)is identified in the Plan for analysis of air samples and environmental samples. The NHY ORO will deliver environmental and food samples to the Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratory in Westborough, Massachusetts, for analysis. i The laboratory sample analysis capacities are as follows: for the Mobile Laboratory Equipment Van, gamma spectroscopy for screening samples i average time' for screening is 10-15 minutes, and 96 samples can be LL'

- = g m y< , jf ' qs 4 14-May 1988' H s e y k, w,. V ,i analyzed per day; and for the Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratory, l % '[

gammaLspectroscopy analysis' for radiolodines,'cesiums and1other -fission

~ ' products, anl average ~ time for sampletanalysis of 4 hours,iandL 50-100 a; -samples can be analyzed per day, and analysis for strontium / average time for sample analysis of'l-2 days, and 10-20 samples can be handled per day.1 LNHY ORO states.that additional laboratory assistance capabilities can be. Y v !obtained by activation of the New England Compact by the Commonwealth .. 7 ' f of; Massachusetts or the State of New Hampshire,.and' additional; Federal ' laboratory support can be obtained through the activation of the FRERP. l7 iPlan Reference H ~ 1

C.3.

' Section 3.3.4 and Table 3.3 3.. .g Evaluation ~ C.3.: ' Adequate. ,I' i . Evaluation Criteria - C.4. The offsite response organization shallidentify nuclear and other facilities, organizations or individuals which can be relled upon in an emergency to provide. assistance. Such assistance shall be identified and supported by -

appropriate letters of agreement.

Statement 'C.4. NHY ORO has contracts and letters of agreement with various support organizations, and individuals. These support ' groups includes (1) the American Red Cross,-which will operate and provide staff for Congregate-Care Centers (if extra staff are available, will provide staff for the Reception Centers); (2) Emergency Broadcast System (use of EBS stations to broadcast emergency or public information messages); (3) hospitals ~ t . (hospitals outside the Plume Exposure EPZ to treat contaminated injured individuals or accept evacuees from special facilities within the EPZ); (4) ambulance companies (provide emergency vehicles capable of transporting nonambulatory and contaminated and/or injured individuals); (5) bus companics (vehicles and drivers capable of transporting evacuees, M including school children out of the Plume Exposure EPZ); (6) Yankee Atomic Electric Company (support available from Yankee Atomic Laboratory and regional nuclear utilities, e.g., laboratories, instrumentation, and monitoring and field sampling personnel); (7) road L crew companies (towing service during an evacuation); (8) helicopter service (helicopters for surveillance of evacuation, road impediment

mg .q r ,,J-1 15' (, .May.'19 8 8 3 -l spotting, transportation of key personnel, and'fleld sample transportation) { (9) snow removal (snow removal from NHY ORO facilities). NHY has a' letter of agreement for radiological waste disposal and. transportation, if required, from.the decontamination facilities. Copies of the letters of agreement'are provided in' the Plan for all of the above listed s :pport groups.. s p D Plan Reference C.4. Section 2.4 and Appendix C.. p Evaluation p C.4. Adequate. j Evaluation Criteria C.S. The offsite response organization shall provide personnel to ' advise and n assist State and local officicls in implementing those portions of the offsite . plan where State or local response is identified. Statement C.S. NHY ORO has identified personnel that will accompany, advise, and/or assist Commonwealth and local l officials In implementing positions of the NHY ORO Plan. f Personnel assigned to advise and assist Commonwealth and local officials I include: (1) Local EOC Liaisons (one liaison reports to each local EOC and assists in the response efforts of that community; (2) School Liaisons (one l !!aison reports to each Local EOC to provide notification and coordination of protective actions with school authorities); (3) Special Population i Liaisons (one liaison reports to each local EOC and works with the Special Population group and authorities of that community);(4) Dosimetry Record { Keepers (one record keeper to issue dosimetry for local emerpncy workers); (5) State Liaisons (one liaison reports to each of the following L.. facilities: the State EOC in Framingham, the Area 1 EOC in Tewksbury, and the MDPH office in Boston to better support the State's emergency I response and to provide status reports of the State's emergency response directly to the NHY ORO; and (6) Public Information Coordinator / Advisor (reports to the Media Center) and is responsible for assisting Common- [ wealth and local government officials with public information and rumor control activities. p E_

16 May 1988 Plan Reference C.S. Section 1.1; Section 2.2; IP 1.8; IP 1.9; IP 1.10; IP 1.11; and IP Evaluation C.S. Adequate. i 1

A l T _~_ } { ? - V '17 May;1933;j D. " Emergency Classification System (Planning Standard D): ~ { A' standard emergencyL classification and action level scheme,.the 1 licensee, and State and local response plan 4 ~ by facility -_ licensees. for determinations of minimum initial offsite. response . measures. 3 Evaluation Criteria i D.3.- The. offsite response organization shall establish an emergency: classification and emergency action level scheme consistent with that established by the facility licensee. Statement D.3. The Plan establishes four emergency classification levels: (1) Notifica -l of _ Unusual Event; (2) Alert; (3) Site Area Emergency; and (4) Gene Emergency. The Plan states that this emergency classification system is based upon ~ the Emergency Action Levels established by the Seabro Station. Plan' Reference D.3. Section 1.3.2. Evaluation D.3. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria D.4. The offsite response organization should have procedures in place that provide for implementing emergency actions and that provide for advis State and local officials on emergency actions to be taken which are consistent with the emergency actions recommended by the nuclear fa licensee, taking into account local offsite conditions that exist at the time of the emergency. Statement D.4. NHY ORO has procedures in place to implement emergency actions. i I

~.g

p.,u u 4

.,t. . af : 3 s, j :"W,,=,; ',. '4-;, 'kN '7, 18.1 May,4988.- d,i, lV, y, (.j yy ' +

., 3

+_ i 7 og .j . plans' to advise the ' Commonwealth and local officials ~en: NHY OROL M ,~ appropriate emergency actions. .. j !. I b 3 f_' I l ,i";,,..'N c Plait Reference. + , c.; ' Y.. s F ..g D.4 L Section 3.1 and IP 2.14. g s.1 1 llF,< Evaluation 'L

y si.

i' .D.4. Adequate. 4 v 1 f, , - { a-- I, f t t I 1 4 1 gr[l f^ 1 i .'l j i O'i m ,,,l__m.__ - - -. ___--aa__---

m. -. _,~ y' s i ,9) y

.y r

t, ~ 19'

k1 May1988 y,*M.

[ J ]..

E.'

Notification ~ Methods and Procedures (Planning Standard E): ' Procedures have been establis$ed for notification, by the licensee of State and local ~ > f" ;

response _ organizations and 'for _ notification.of.. emergency personnel by all response i organizations; the' content of initial and followup messages to response organizations and public has been establ!shed; and means to provide early notification'and clear instruction' to the populace within the plume exposure pathway Emergency Planning

Zone have been established. ti ; L valuation Criteria E E.1. The offsite response organization shall establish procedures lwhich describe- 'the bases for. notification of all response organizations consistent with the : . emergency cyl ossification and action level scheme set forth in Appendix 1 off 1 f - NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1. These procedures 'shall include means . for verification of messages. The specific details of verification need not - be included in the offsite plan.. ' Statement - E.1.- Notification of response organizations is triggered by the standard four-level ECL scheme from FEMA-REP-1, Rev.' 1. c Initial notification of the NHY ORO is performed by the Seabrook Station Control Room Communicator contacting the NHY ORO EOC. Contact Point, using the NAS or one of two backup systems. Verification will not-be performed if. notification is via NAS since it is a secure system; if a backup system is used, verification will be.by caU-back over the same system. : At ECLs of Alert or higher, receipt of notification will be taken over by the NAS Communicator upon arrival at the NHY ORO EOC. Notification of Massachusetts state and local government agencies is-addressed in section 3.2.3. The Seabrook Station Control Room Communicator will notify the Massachusetts State Police. The plan references the Massachusetts Radiological Emergency Response Plan with respect to notification of other Commonwealth and local government units by the State Police. The NHY ORO EOC Contact will also provide backup notification to local government dispatchers at ECLs of Alert or higher. Notification of Federal and support organizations is addressed in i section 3.2.4. Responsibility for notification of Federal agencies is placed { with the State of New Hampshire as the host state (p. 3.2-12), except that l the NHY ORO EOC Contact or the NAS Communicator will notify the DOI at the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge in order to implement public notification. l __w_____

a.., qlij Qp 4 q-i s .20 'May 1988 7_ a a j7 ~ The NHY ORO will also notify contracted support organizations:. e.g., bus . companies, road crew companies,- ambulance companies, and ' the.~ Red ~ Cross. ! Table 3.2-1 indicates who.within the NHY ORO is responsible for - .x y contacting each type of support organization, and at what. ECL. - All - support organizations r.re contacted at Alert or higher ECLs, but many are 4 only notified after. the responsible notifier has arrived at their response - f acility. y t Plan Reference <l4 E.1.- Seetion 3.2.1;' Section. 3.2.2; Seetion. 3.2.3; Section' 3.2.4; Figure 3.2-1; p Figure 3.2-2; Table 3.2-1; IP 2.1; Appendix G; Appendix H; and Appendix.M. e j Evaluation. E.1.. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria ~E.2. The offsite. response organization shall ' establish procedures for alerting, notifying, and mobilizing emergency response personnel. f:' . Statement - E.2. - Notification and mobilization of NHY ORO is initiated by Security at the NHY ORO' EOC Contact Point or by the NAS Communicator. Key personnel carry pagers and are contacted at NOUE. The rest of the NHY ORO are contacted at the Alert ECL via an automated telephone dialing

system, the Melita Emergency Telenotification System (METS).

Table 3.2-1 Indicates which personnel are notified and which are mobilized at each ECL. The plan also indicates that a telephone tree will be set up as a backup personnel notification system. See comments under F.1.e. Plan Reference 7+9 E.2. Section 3.2.2;IP 2.1; Appendix G; and Appendix H. .a Evaluation I E.2.- Adequate. __1_.__E.__.__1.___

21' ' May 1993 Ev luation Criteria ~ E. 3.- The licensee' in conjunction with the offsite response. organization shall! establish the content of the initial emergency messages to be sent from the - plant..These measures shall contain 'information.about the class of. emergency, whether a release is taking place, potentially affected . population and areas, and whether protective measures may be necessary. j ' Statement E.3. The' initial emergency message from 'the Seabrook Station Control' Room ' Communicator to.the NHY ORO EOC Contact Point is transcribed on the . State Notification Fact Sheet. This form includes the name and title of the caller, the ECL. and time declared, a checklist with a protective action recommendatMn for " shelter" or " evacuate" for each EPZ town; a checklist with a PAR of "close" for Salisbury Beach, for Parker River National Wildlife Refuge, and Plum Island Beach; the status of the emergency and the status of any release. Plan Reference ' E.3. Section 3.2; Figure 3.2-2; IP 2.1; and Appendix G. Evaluation-E.3.- Adequate. 1 Evaluation Criteric E.4. Each licensee shall make provisions for followup messages from the facility to. the offsite response organization (and to offsite authorities where possible) which shall contain the following information if it is known and j appropriate:

a. - location of incident and name and telephone number (or communications channel identification) of caller; i

b. date/ time of incident; l c. class of emergency; d. type of actual or projected release (airborne, waterborne, surface spill), and estimated duration / impact times; Y

,7' 22- 'May'1998 ~' qe e.,..estim' ate of quantity of radioactive material released or being released - and the points and height of releases; q

f..- chemical and' physical form of released. material, including estimates of the relative quantities.and concentration of noble gases, lodines and particulate;
o g..

meteorological' conditions at, appropriate levels (wind speed, direction -(to and from), indicator of stability, precipitation, if any);. h.' actual' or projected dose rates at the boundary; projected integrated . dose at site boundary;- l.'. projected dose rates and integrated dose at the projected peak and at h ' 2,5 and 20 miles, including sector (s) affected;

j. ' estimate of. any surface radioactive contamination inplant, onsite or

' offsits. k. licensee emergency response actions underway; i f 1. rf. commended emergency actions, including protective measures; . request for any needed onsite support by offsite organizations; and m. prognosis for worsening or termination of event bssed on plant n. information. Statement E.4. The Plan states in Section 3.2 (p. 3.2-2) that " initial and/or follow-up notification information provided by the Seabrook Station will include:" and then lists all of the points mentioned in the guidance. Follow up messages I from the Beabrook Station Control Room Communicator to the NHY ORO EOC Contact Point or the NAS Communicator are to use the Follow-Up i information Form. L Plan Reference l E.4. Section 3.2;IP 2.1; and Appendix G.

g, y 23' F.ny 1980 Evabation E.4. ' Adequate. 1 A Evaluation Criteria E. 5.' The offsite response organization shall' establish a system for disseminating to the public appropriate. information contained in initial and followup messages received from the licensee including the appropriate notification-to appropriate-broadcast media, e.g., the Emergency Broadcast System (EBS). Statement 'E.S. The primary s stem for disseminating information to the public is EBS. In event of -an emergency, the NHY ORO Offsite Response Director will request authority from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to utilize EBS. to broadcast emergency information and instructions to the public. Each . instruction message broadcast over fed will also be released as a news release by the Media Center. The identified EBS radio station does not have adequate capability. The current capability does not include the ability to record and broadcast emergency instructions and information to the public. The identified EBS station does not have a backup power supply at this time, f The Public Notification Coordinator, once the NHY ORO is activated, begins preliminary planning with the Radiological Health Advisor and the Technical Advisor regarding the possible PARS. Upon the orders of the NHY Offsite Response Director, the Public Notification Coordinator selects the appropriate EBS message, completes the appropriate sections, reviews the message with the NHY Offsite Response Director, coordinates the message with the State of New Hampshire, obtains NHY Offsite Response Director's approval for broadcasting the EBS message, coordinates the activation of the Public Notification Staff, faxes the EBS message ' to the EBS radio station, requests the EBS radio station to broadcast the message three times consecutively, and then every L 15 minutes thereafter. The Public Notification Coordinator has the responsibility to direct the Communications Coordinator to activate the siren system and to advise the Special Population Coordinator on the need to initiate notification of hearing-tmpaired people. Actual broadcast of the message is monitored by the Public Notification Coordinator. The Public Notification Coordinator also supplies copies of the EBS message to the Public Information Advisor, the Support Services Coordinator, and the l Special Population Coordinator.

m, 1 p', W, fyg;[ y% 4 W [9[ {3 ~ " ?24 'May 1988t \\l f}& YQ:N 7 n a fast breding emergency, the Seabrook Station Short-Term Emergency hlg" ' " ~ " g. Director can request authorization from the Governor of Massachusetts and> p-r perform'the EBS functions' ordinarily performed by the Public Notification d:' N', Coordinator.i(See discussion under element E.6.) 4 4 t 4 6 Q. Plan Reference E.5L - Section 3.2.5; Section'3.7.d; IP 2.12; and IP 2.13.

o hi Evaluation E.5.n

' Inadequate.- The~ capability of the 'EBS' Radio Station does not include the ability' to c i '

record; and' broadcast emergency, instructions: and :Information to :the

~ r public.4The identified EBS station does not have's backup power supply at. ~ this time. NHY has committed to provide backup power an'd the capabilityL

to record and broadcast'instru'ctio'ns by.6/30/88.

Evaluation Criteria - e

E.S.

. The. offsite ' response _ organization 'shall _ establish administrative and physical means, and the time required for notifying and providing prompt - ~ instructions' to the public within' the p'ume exposure pathway Emergency _ .. Planning Zone (see' Appendix 3'of NUF.EG-0654/ FEMA-REP-li Rev. I and ' FEMA-REP-10'. It shall be the licensee's responsibility to demonstrate ) ' that such means exist, regardless of who implements this requirement. The Loffsite response. organization shall have 'the administrative and physical means to activate the system.. - Statement

E.6.

The Plan references the Vehicular Alert and~ Notification System for' ^ e,m alerting of the general (resident) population, the beach transient population at Salisbury Beach and Plum Island Beach, and persons on inland waterways. The Vehicular Alert and Notification System is not operational ~t this time. We understand that NHY ORO has not established ] a administrative procedures for activating the Vehicular Alert and 1 Notification System (i.e., we could not locate IP 2.15 or IP 2.16). 1 i Tone alert radio receivers are to be offered to schools, day care centers, nursing homes, hospitals, medical facilities, campgrounds, businesses with 50 or more employees at one location, and other selected facilities within the plume EPZ as a backup system (p. 3.2-15). These tone alert radios have not been distributed at this time. .-_----_----a_------,

1 i ) .25 May 1988 ) j The NHY ORO has established four special. alerting systems: (1) The { transients within the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge on Plum Island l are to be notified by a route alerting system operated by the DOI; (2) The ) hearing-impaired individuals are to be telephoned individually by the NHY ORO; (3)lf telephone contact is not made, she back up system is for NHY l ORO perronnel to be dispatched to perform door-to-door alerting and df: stion and to offer, assistance; (4) Persons on the Atlantic Ocean wi. the plume EPZ will be notified by the USCG. In a' fast breaking emergency, the plan calls for the "Seabrook Station Short-term Emergency Director" to request authorization from the Governor of Massachusetts, and activate the Vehicular Alert and Notification System and EBS. In cases when the NHY ORO EOC is activated, the NHY ORO, upon authorization of the officials of one j Commonwealth of Massachusetts, will direct the activation of the } Vehicular Aleriand Notification System. l 1 i Plan Reference E.6. Section 3.2.5; Section 3.6.1; Section 3.7.3; IP 2.7; IP 2.11; and IP 2.13. Evaluation E.6. !nadequate. The Vehicular Alert and Notification System is not operational et this time. We could not locate the route-alerting procedures for the DO!. Route Alerting procedures for Parker River National Wildlife Refuge have not been developed. NHY ORO has not established administrative procedures for activating the Vebicular Alert and Notification System. Evaluation Criteria E.7. The offsite response organization shall provide written messages intended for the public, consistent with the licensee's classification scheme. In particular, draft messages to the public giving instructions with regard to specific protective acticas to be taken by occupants of affected areas shall be prepared and included as part of the offsite plans. The prescripted messages should address the various conditions such as the delegation of authority by the State and local governments to the offsite response organization to issue prompt instructions. Such messages should include the appropriate aspects of sheltering, e.g., handkerchief over mouth, thyroid blocking or evacuation. The role of the licensee is to provide j supporting information for the messages. For ad hoc respiratory protection l see " Respiratory Protective Devices Manual" American Industrial Hygiene I Association,1963, pp.123-126. l l 1

7-w:7 ;;;. Of p !;'I '.' -e r

q';.

r 'I

c. g *

'; 'f ' :ll ~ {,1 J% ,,.- r, . 26 - Fay'.19 8 8. m: at E,,.. m h., . Statement E h

E.7.'

There, are :prescripted. messages for a combination of emergency conditions.., Most. messages include a variety of choices among PA options and areas to which they apply. Following is a summary of the messages conveying pas; in addition, a number of messages are included in IP 2.13 ' ..that are supplementary 'in nature. p-t r.', w y a ? [' F I E i i i e i e+, j l J _2_ _ _ __. _ _ _ _ _ _... _. _. l

x yr yr yr r e re re uk uk uk b r b r b r ' sa sa s iP iP iP t t t l ~ r r r ae. l l ae aa S e e e Sh Sh Sh B l l l t t m m E A A A m-og. og og. f. f f. f rne r ne r ) o o o o fi g fi g fi s ,d u ,d u 'c c c c uf uf ( r n i i i i sl e sl e sl l l l l acR acR ac o i b b b b . en. . en . e t u u u u e eri e erie) eri e f f 5 n a na,i n a ', i 1 c p p p p n o o o A o s s s s z zkdl zkdl zkdl m m m r nd r nd r r e m v r y r r r y yaal yaal e yaal i t pl ib t pl i i or o o o t t pl t f o f f f e e sW e sW m e c ns d n n f f dI f dI~ e f dI a an l an-l t an-e ii i i i 'e d e e e - ama s ama p s am v s s t un une or ga g g g n nhl o nhl oS nhl P a a a a a acPi acPi - acPi s n s s s e ea t ea t - ea s o s s s c ceoa c eoa c e ei e e e o obt N obt N5 obt mt m m m 1 a e eeh r eeh r eeh l v l l s s s c e s s c ey s s si s s s o ooa v ooa v a ooa eiH A t A A A l l l ei l l l l P c P P P C CCBR CCBR( CCRR a ~ o o o o N N N N s ~ n n? d d d o eoe e e e i ti r t t t s s i t a a o o a a o t e e c s ae t N N t t N Y Y A fil s s s f d e n n n e oar U U U v R: i t ~ ce t t o nn r ei3 P m 1 h r. 4 5 f> 7 8 9 0 1 g 1 1 ee2 n ab iy t mP e t uI v AN noC n s o hs e i g t 5i 1 l a a s c ) y y g y y i d c crn c c se f e n nee n n M i d e eb e e a r g gmn g g S ml o r r ei r r ~. R ae ) c e) et ) e e l v d e md m pd h m m E C e e r E e E eec E E fo L d e d Sd n y r r ar a r e a a y c o p eo e-or e e r n c ( rc r cF r r a e e A e A5 e A A n g t r t t t r 1 rd r r e r r r ee e en e e a m e er e e e ' t r t yr a t t ap i i l p l l l ip i u m B E A( A A A S( SH( S S

x yr yr s yr yr Z re r e A r e r e P uk uk P uk uk E b r b r R b r b r b h s a s a E s a s a e t iP iP iP iP m i ~ l l u l o l l Z l 'b a e ae P ae ae Sh Sh E Sh Sh p) S r t t t t d o m m .e m m se og. og m og. og t u =T' .J E fi g fi gl fi g fi g es f rne rneu r ne r ne t s ) u p u .d ,d ,d u si ,d u s uf uf uf uf u ( A n P sl e sl e s sl e sl e h n o R acR acR t acR acR c e . en t . en . en . ah .e i E. en t erie) eri ee e ri e eri e) s w eri c ,na f 5 na f s na f na f 5 s na A B o ,i1 o ,i u o ,i o ,i1 ae o zkdl zkdl h zkdl zkdl - Hd zk e A r nd r r nd c r nd r nd r a v P yaal e yaal a yaal yaal ed m yaa b e t pl i t pl i s t pl b t pl i i R t pl i t E e sWh e sW s e sW e sW mt n e' c f dI c f dI a f dI f dI eao f d an l t ni a M an l t an e r an l l t es amap s ama s ama sa map gt s a o h une unh un uneic r t nhl oS nhl ot nhl o nhl oS s e nh acPi acPi o acPi acPi el a c P ieea t - ea t b ea t ea t - d e ea c eoa c eoa c eoa c eoa s c robt N5 obt N r obt N obt N5 r( ob e 's e. - 1 e 1 ee t eeh r' eeh rt eeh r eeh r t l s s c ey s s c el s s c e s s c eyl A s s eooa v a ooa ve ooa v ooava eP oo eiMhR l l ei l l l l eih l l hl l eiM SCCBR( CCBRS cCBR cCBR( SE CCB a

a
n?

d d eoe e e ti s t t s s i t a a a o e e sae t t N Y Y fil s s f d e n n O aR U U - R tnn ei m 3 h r1 ce. 3 4 5 6 7 ab2 1 1 1 1 1 t m t uP ANI no hs i t 5i 1 l ac y g i c rn f n y yeE y y i e c cb c c s g n nmn n n sl r e eei e eg ae e g) gt ) g ~ l v m rd r pd h r r C e E ee eeec e e L md mSd n m m y a E r E r e E E c e o - or n r l c l cF l l e A ae a5 e a a g rr r1 rd r r r e ee e en e e e t nr nyr a n n i ep eap e e m E S G( GH( C C ll

Z Z Z yr P Z yr P Z yr P re E P re E P r e E E uk E uk uk 'e b r e b r e b r sa m e s a m e s a m iP u m iP u m iP u l l u l l u l l ae p .l ae p .l ,a e p.- Sh ) p) - Sh ) p) Sh ) t sd d t sd d t sd m t ese m t ese m t e og t ut u og t ut u og t u rne es t s rne es t s r ne es fi g s s es fi g s s es fi g s s u uf h u uf h - u ui ,d u uisi ,d u uisi ,d ) h'nh = '- s uf ( sl e c n sl e c nh n sl e c n + n acR a ece acR aec e acR ae o . en . sh ah .en . sh ah . en . sh i eri e) s ws w eri e) s ws w eri e) s w t na f 5 a s n a f5 a. s na f 5 a c o ,i1 M eae o ,i1 Meae o ,i1 M e A zkdl d Md zkdl d Md zkdl d r nd rd a a r nd rd a a r nd rd a e yaal e emd m yaal eemd m yaal e em b t b t - ~ e t pl i b t e - t pl v t pl i i i e sW mant n e - sW mant n e sW man l t gi t f dI e poao f dI enoao f dI e no c an l t bi ni an-l t gi ni an e s e m a pi t gt s a m a pi t gt s a m a pi t t unes cic une s cic unes c o nhl oS eese nhl oS ees e nhl oS ee r acPi dl el acPi dl el acPi dl P ea t - ed e ea~ t - ed e ea t - e c eoa - es. s c eoa es s c eoa es obt N5 t( r( obt N5 t( r( obt N5 t( a's 1 a e 1 a e 1 'e e h r - ust s eeh r : ust s eeh r u s s c eycAl A s s c eycAl A s sc eycA ooav a aP eP ooava aP eP ooava aP eiM vR eiM vRhR eiM vRhR l l l l l l CCBR( EESE CCBR( EESE CCBR( EE a

4 n?

eoe _ ti s s i t a o o e N s ae N Y fi l ~ f d e O aR R ' 1 tnn ei m 3 h r1 c e. 8 9 0 ab2 1 1 2 t m t uP ANI no i tac i f y y y i c c c s. n n n sl e e e ae g g g l v r r r C e e e e L m m m y E E E cn l l l e a a a g r r r r e e e e n n n m e e e E G G C

, yc. t s 1> ; .30

May 1988 l 4

Plan Reference .c X E.7.. , Section 3.2.5; Section 3.7.3; and IP 2.13. ,l s; 9 Evaluation E.7. Adequate.- Evaluation Criteria E.8.. There shall be provisions for coordinating emergency messages with participating and nor.-participating State and local governments.. t Statement - E.8. Responsibility for coordinating with New Hampshire. is assigned to the Public Notification Coordinator. The coordination process is built into the EBS procedure. Coordination with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts -l consists of requesting authorization from the Governor to issue the-prescripted messages. Plan Reference E.8. Section 3.2.5; IP 1.1; IP 2.13; and IP 2.14. Evaluation ? E.8. Adequate. 1 1 ( i L t.

31 May 1938 o F.' Emergency Communications (Planning Standard F): Provisions exist for prompt communications among principal r'esponse organizations to emergency personnel and to the public. N ' Evaluation Criteria F.1.. The communication plans for emergencies shall include organizational titles and alternates for both ends of the communication links. Reliable primary and backup means of communication for the utility and the offsite response organization shall be established. The utility and the offsite response organization.shall establish the capability to communicate with non-participating State and. local governments via normal emergency . telephone numger(s) (e.g., 911) and via one other backup mode such as the ability to transmit via existing emergency radio frequencies. Each offsite plan shall include: F.1.a. Provision for 24-hour per day notification to and activation of the offsite response organization's emergency response network; and at a minimum, a telephone !!nk and alternate, including 24-hour per day manning of communication links that initiate emergency response actions; Statement F.1.a. The Plan provides that initial notification of an emergency classification be received by the NHY ORO EOC Contact Point which is manned on a 24-hour ~ basis by security personnel. This notification is to be sent by the Seabrook Station Control Room Communicator by means of the Nuclear Alert System (NAS), a system of microwave and telephone links with conferencing capabilities. Backups for NAS are (1) the Dimension 2000 system, a NHY microwave telephone that does not rely on telephone company central office switching; and (2) commercial telephone lines. Plan Reference F.1.a. Section 3.2.2; Section 4; Section 4.1; Section 4.2; and Figure 4.0-1. Evaluation F.1.a. Adequate. u i._._.________.__._______.

q% l L @g -.. _sl$ ' m J Q3f,, y A } i w 32. May59G8 g $ d f' ', o Wp 'T @f > h l 1 q EvaluaElon Criteria t V l F.1.b.' : IProvisiin f$r communications with contiguous States and local' governments. %a s within the Emergency Planning Zones;- Statement i> ( The Plan provides for communications with the. State of New; Hampshire.- F.1.b. q m J EOC, New Hampshire State Police, New Hampshire Office of Emergency 7 Management, and the New Hampshire IFO. by : means of NAS with: ] commercial. telephone as backup. It also provides for a second backup [i system. for communication' with the New J Hampshire State -EO CT via- ?p

EmergencyJRadio Network Channel '3.

NAS extensions and commercial telephone nrmbers are given for. these New Hampshire' agencies 'and - y facilities in Appendix H.' There is a discrepancy between Appendix H and- / Figure ' 4.0-11(Communications Summary) in that the Figure does; not L . identify '.the Emergency Radio Network as a backup system while 1 Appendix H - does. Appendix H also gives : the commercial telephone. numbers 'of the Division of Public' Health Services of the New Hampshire Department 'of Health and Human Services..The Plan does not address l . communications with local governments in New Hampshire. l The NHY-ORO Offsite Response Director has responsibility for most communications with New Hampshire. n 1 The-Plan addresses communications with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts by means of NAS,' with commercial telephones, and the C' Massachusetts Government' Interface (MAGI) as backups. MAGI is the collective name given to several radio networks that can-be used to coordinate emergency response activities of Federal, state, local, and -q N private response' organizations. Appendix H contains commercial telephone 1 . numbers of the offices of other relevant Massachusetts agencies. o i The Plan provides that communications with local Massach'usetts EOCs will ) be by means'of commercial telephone as the primary system, and the MAGI system as backup. For five of the six local governments there are five elements for MAGI: state-to-local radio frequency;. local dispatch radio network; command and control radio frequency; RACES; and NESPERN. For Amesbury, there are only the first two elements. 1 Plan Reference F.1.b.- Section 4; Figure 4.0-1; and Appendix H. b b r b __c

m, f 4? gl' 33 May 1988 W

Evaluation-F.1.b.

Adequate. n. EI Evaluation Criteria -F.1.c. provision for communications as needed with Federal emergency response organizations; [- Statement F.1.c. The Plan' addresses communications with Federal agencies. Three' Federal agencies have primary response responsibilities: USCG; the FAA; and DOI, ' whose Fish and Illdlife Service administers the Parker River National b Wildlife Refuge on Plum Island. Commercial telephone is identified as a communication link with these Federal agencies, as well as with FEMA and several other Federal agencies. The only Federal agencies for which backup systems _were found were the USCG (marine band radio) and FEMA (RACES). In Appendix H, the statement is made that other Federal communications links. are available through the Seabrook Station EOF, which is located in the same building as the NHY ORO EOC. The Plan states that the communications links to the Federal agencies in the EOF are described in the State of New Hampshire Radiological Emergency Response Plan. P Plan Reference F.1.c. Section 4; Figure 4.0-1; and Appendix H. Evaluation F.1.c. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria F.1.d. provision for communications between the nuclear facility and the licensee's near-site Emergency Operations facility, offsite response organization's emergency operations centers, and radiological monitoring teams;

I M$ 34 May 1988-j N .I Statement

F.1.d.

The Plan' provides for three communications links.with each of three ,1 Seabrook Station facilities: ; the control room, the Technical Support ] Center, -and the EOF. These links. are NAS, Dimension 2000, and commercial telephone. These systems are located in the Communications Room of the NHY ORO EOC and are manned by-the NHY ORO EOC Contact or the NAS Communicator. The primary communications link with the radiological monitoring teams and sample collection teams is-the Public Service of New Hampshire u (PSNH) Radio Network, with commercial. telephone' as backup. The NHY ORO EOC staff person with responsibility for communicating with the field monitoring teams and sample. collection teams is the Field Team Dispatcher, who rgorts to the Accident Assessment Coordinator. The Figure showing the layout of.the NHY ORO EOC (Figure 5.2-2) indicates that they occupy adjacent desks in the Offsite Radiological Assessment ' Room..This Figure shows the Field Team Dispatcher's desk to be equipped - with 'a commercial' telephone,- but not with the primary communications link,'the PSNH radio. The. Plan addresses communications between the NHY ORO EOC and the Staging Area, the Emergency Worker Facility, the Reception. Centers, and the Monitoring Trailers at the Reception Centers. For all these facilities, -one communications link is the NHY ORO Emergency Radio Network, which consists of four paired frequencies. For the Emergency Worker Facility and Monitoring Trailers another communications link is cellular mobile telephone. We could not locate the Legend on Fig. 4.0-1 for cellular mobile telephones. For the Staging Area and Reception Centers, commercial telephone is another communications link. For the Congregate Care Centers, commercial telephone is the only communications link specified. From the Figure showing the layout of the Staging Area (Figure 5.2-4), it has 20 commercial telephones, an Emergency Medical Service (EMS) radio, and four ORO Emergency radios. Special Vehicle Dispatchers, Evacuation Support Dispatchers, Local EOC Liaisons, Special Population Liaisons, and School Liaisons share telephones (two per extension). The figures showing the layout of the Monitoring Trailers (Figure 5.2-9) and the Emergency Worker Facility (Figure 5.2-10) do not show any communications equipment in these trailers. From the figures showing the layout of the Reception Centers (Figures 5.2-6 and 5.2-8), there are at least two telephones and two NHY ORO Emerdency radio frequencies at each Reception Center. One telephone is for the Reception Center Leader; the other communications j equipment are manned by Reception Center Staff. A )

<\\ ut

35-M.sy 1980 t

Plan Reference ' F.1.d. - Section : '4; Figure ' 4.0-1;.. Figure 5.2-2; Figure 5.2-4, Figure 5.2-6, Figure 5.2-8; Figure 5.2-9; and figure 5.2-10. g Evaluatio'n, F.1.d. Adequate. Evaluation Celteria 'F.1.e.' Provision for alerting or activating emergency personnel in each response organization; / r Statement F.1.e. The NHY ORO EOC Contact is responsible for initial receipt and . verification of. the' initial notification from Seabrook Station. Upon activation o( the NHY ORO EOC, the NAS Communicator is responsible for receipt and verification of notifications from Seabrook Station. The NAS Communicator is responsible for notification for the NHY ORO response j personnel. NHY ORO will be notified in three stages: Stage 1 at Unusual Event by pager and Melita computer system, Stage 2 at Alert by pager and Melita computer system, and Stage 3 at Site Area and General Emergency by pager and Melita computer system. In the event the computer. notification system is inoperative, there will be .a backup telephone callout tree notification system. The backup notification system will be implemented by a contractor. The contractor will use telephone listings provided by NHY. Appendix H will be deleted and IP 2.1 has been revised. Plan Reference F.1.e. Section 3.2; Section 4; IP 2.1; Appendix G; and Appendix H. 1 i a.

7, y w y., &'yfh ? 136' ~.6y 1983 j I; 1 g a3 /; } . Evaluation. m,c L F.1'.e.. Inadequate.- I The backup notification system does not axist. Commercial services to y perform backup notification are currently being sought. Evaluation Criteria i [ .F.2. The offsita resperse organization shall ensure-that a coordinated. L communication'llnk for fixed and mobile medical support facilities exists. Statement .F.2. l'he Plan states that communications links with hospitals and ambulance companies are ' commercial telephone and medical radio frequencies. Communications with~ hospitals and other special-facilities are i responsibilities of the Special Populations Liaisons (stationed at the Staging ' Area) and the Special Populations Coordinator (stationed at the NHY ORO EOC) is responsible for-contacting ambulance companies, host hospitals, nursing homes, and the backup hospita.l. . J, Plan Rcterence F.2. Section 4.0; Appendix C; Appendix H; and Appendix M. Evaluation F.2. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria F.3. The offsite response organization shall conduct periodic testing of the entire emergency communications system (see evaluation criteria H.10, N.2.a and Appendix 3 of NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1). Statement F.3. The Plan provides for periodic testing of the NHY ORO communications systems and contains testing checklists and logs. Depending on the specific .I system, tests are performed weekly, monthly, quarterly, or semiannually. Not all communications systems described elsewhere are e.-;tessly i i RR l

y. y:,~,.w. ; v 9 .n-

2,

'T. .' #3 :. .37 }.ay 1988-s g s ~ ~ . contained Inj the testing schedule. These are the NHY;ORO Emergency 4 ~ Radio Network,L the PSNH Radio Network, Marine Band Radio, American L Red Cross radio, and EMS radio.. It is assumed that these radio systems are .49, included in the " Field Radio Communic'ations System" referred to in the testing l schedule. If 'not, then there is no testing schedule for these' radio

systems.

1 s Plan Reference 'F.3. Section 4 Section 7.4; and IP 4.4. . Evaluation : 1 .s F.3. Adequate.'- p: h. I li I \\ l t 'l 4 g

>gg q p w.s jg W t( l 2 :i "

38-May 1988L l

~G. Public Education and Information'(Planning' Standard G):. Information is made available to the public on a perio' die basis on how they will be. . notified and what their initial actions shall be in an emergency (e.g.,~ listening to'.a local broadcast station and remaining indoors), the principal points of contact'with. the news media for dissemination of information during an emergency (including the physical. location or. locations) are esta' lished1 in. advance, and procedures;for: b coordinated dissemination of information.to the public are established. Evaluation Criteria G.I.. The loffsite response organization shall provide a coordinated periodic (at' least ' annually) dissemination of information-to the public' regarding.how they_ will be notifjpd'and what their' actions should be in an emergency.: This information shall Include, but not necessarily be limited to: a. educational information on radiation; b. contact for additionalinformation; c. ' protective measures, e.g., ^ evacuation routes and relocation centers, sheltering, respiratory protection, radioprotective drugs; ' d.' special needs of the handicapped; and e. special steps to be taken to' describe the role of the offsite response organization vs. the State and local organizations during the . emergency. Means for accomplishing' this dissemination may include, but are not necessarily limited to: information in the telephone book; posting in public areas; and publ! cations distributed on an annual basis. Statement G.I. The Plan states that the New Hampshire Yankee Emergency Planning . Coordinator is the designated official of the NHY ORO who is responsible for the public information program. This includes the annual review, update, and distribution of-public information material to the general population. The public information materials are to be revised prior to the operation of Seabrook Station above five percent power. The Plan includes e public information package containing eighteen different items for educating and preparing the public in affected Massachusetts communities for a radiological emergency at Seabrook. J 1 l

7 --___7_._ .,a1

1. 3,

,t 5,],k. j ff[j r> "M Mag 1938 h A'mong these materials are:

' 1988-89 Emergency Plan Information Calendar; m

[

i Adhesive-Label -- English; -
: Adhesive Label-. English/ French; l

o 1 Telephon;e Book Insert -- Newburyport/Amesbury Area; i ' Telephone Book Insert -- Haverhill Area; Poster explaining sirens and EBS Stations -- English; Poster explaining sirens and'EBS Stations -- English/ French; Poster depicting ' Massachusetts Emergency Plan Information -- English;

i i

e' i Poster depicting Massachusetts Emergency Plan Information 2nglish/ French; 4 '* ' Flier - Englisli;

- Flier - French; d

o' Special needs survey form;

' Special needs poster; i

Emergency Bu:; Information booklet -- English;. 'e Emergency Bus Information booklet -- French;

- Form letter to hotel / motel / restaurant owners and managers to enclose

? L emergency information for posting; l i Form letter to emplcyers to enclose emergency information for posting; .j e Request card for additional materials; and Farmer's Brochure. Plan Reference G.I. Section 3.7.1; Section 3.7.2; Section 7.5; and the public education material. i l I J L)- _1

L' 40 May ;92S J ~ ' Evaluation C G. I. Inadequate. See Appendix A for the text of FEMA's REP-11 Review and Evaluation of the public information materials specified in the Plan. I Evaluation Criteria G. 2. The public information program shall provide the permanent and transient j adult population within the plume exposure EPZ an adequate opportunity to become aware of the information annually. The programs should include provision for written material that is likely to be available in a residence during an emprgency. Updated information shall ba disseminated at least annually. Signs or other measures (e.g., decals, posted notices, or other means placed in hotels, motels, gasoline stations and phone booths) shall also be used to disseminate to any transient population within the plume exposure pathway EPZ appropriate information that will be helpful if an emergency or accident occurs. Such notices should refer the transient to the telephone directory or other source of local emergency information and guide the visitor to appropriate radio and television frequencies. Statement G. 2. A program for annual distribution of public information materials to residents, transients, and Special Populations is described in the Plan. Mail i distribution of calendars to utility bill recipients and telephone book inserts are the major means of educating the residents of the plume exposure EPZ. Farmers and food processors are to be provided the Farmers' Brochure. We could not locate the distribution list for the Farmers' Brochure (Appendix L). The transient population is to be provided information by its distribution to various public facilities and through the telephone book inserts. The distribution program is planned to include media advertisements sensitizing the public regarding the importance of the public information material. The milestone designated for implementation of the public education program is prior to the operation of Seabrook Station above five percent power. Plan Reference G.2. Section 3.7.1; Section 3.7.2; and Section 7.5.1.

gm.. y n;

it[,' '

, '$ M ' ^ i % i ((U ];

41. -

May'19ss ~ ,s 3 9,M'+"' a n. -,. g > +

a.

Evaluation - 'V ,-y! t A',7 f G.2.. ' Inadequate. M. *< 3 The public education program has not been implemented.- (n s, f f ~1 Evaluation Criteria - .} !b G.3. The offsitel response organization shall designate the points of contact and. physicallocations for use by news media during an emergency. This should : include provisions for accommodating State and local government public { 0 information personnel assigned a role under the offsit'e plan. ~ ' Statement - 'G.3. NHY'ORO has designated the Media Center located in the Town Hall in ' l Newington, New ifampshire as the single point of contact between the NHY .ORO and the media during a radiological emergency at Seabrcok. NHY-ORO has made - provision for accommodating officials' -of .he L. ! m Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The Media Relations staff have been Yb . designated to interface ~ with the media via~ telephone. LThere are I d. instructions to call the various wire services when ' releases are. issued. - 7 L There are references, policy guidance, and provisions to assign personnel to -staff telephones and respond to the media inquiries. .g Plan Reference .o G.3.. Section 3.7.3(B) and IP 2.12. u Evaluation G.3. Adequate. l. Evaluation Criteria G.4.a. The offsite response organization shall designate a spokesperson who should u have access to all necessary information. Statement G.4.a. The Public Information Advisor, one person /shif t, is responsible for coordinating and implementing IP 2.12. The Public Information Advisor

42 May '933 '2 directs the activities of preparing and issuing news releases for the public and media. The Public Information Staff, 4 persons /shif t, is responsible for ootaining ' information, d.eveloping news releases, and transmitting approved news releases to the Public Information Coordinator. The Public Information Advisor and Public Information Staff works at the NHY ORO EOC. The Public Information Coordinator, one person / shift, is responsible for directing the NHY ORO operations at the Media Center. The Public Information Coordinator is responsible for keeping the Public Information Advisor informed of all news media activities and news releases by other organizations at the Media Center. The Media Cepter Support individuals, two persons / shift, are responsible for assisting the Public Information Coordinator at the Media Center. The Public Information Staff develops news releases. The Public Information Advisor will receive the Public Information Coordinator's concurrence and then obtain the NHY Offsite Response Director's approval of the release. Aiter obtaining the NHY Offsite Response Director's approval,' the Public Information Advisor will instruct the Public Information Staff to disseminate the news release. The NHY ORO wN also reissue EBS messages as news releases. The Public Information Staff are lastructed to include in the press releases: the location of the Access Control Points; up-to-date information regarding the response via information on status boards, briefings, and conversations with the various coordinators; information on all response actions affecting the public, including the name and location of the host facilities which have received special facility evacuees; end information on ingestion pathway actions. The Public Information Advisor assigns responsibilities within the Rumor Control Staff for monitoring news media broadcasts and for responding to telephone inquiries. The Public Information Coordinator keeps the Public Information Advisor informed of all news media activities by providing telecopier copies of all organizations news releases. The Public Information Coordinator participates in media briefings. The Public Information Advisor monitors questions from the public, develops standardized responses for use by the Rumor Control Staff, obtains NHY Offsite Response Director's approval, and provides standardized responses 4 to the Rumor Control Staff. Plan Reference I G.4.a. Section 3.7.3(B) and IP 2.12. I l

I;

m

,0 3,gf,, A.

43 May 1988 i j Evaluation i G.4.a. Adequate. Evaluation Ctiteria 9 Z ' G.4.b. The offsite. response organization shall establish arrangements for timely exchange of information among designated spokespersons. - Statement G.4.b. The Pin states that ' the Public 'Information Coordinator at the Media-Center is to Acordinate news releases approved for release by the NHY ORO with the Media Center spokespersons for Seabrook Station, State-media representatives, and Federal organizations prior to their release to the media. Plan Reference . G.4.b. - Section 3.7.3(B) and IP 2.12. Evaluation 4 ~ G.4.b. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria G.4.c. The offsite response organization shall establish coordinated arrangements for dealing with rumors. Statement G.4.c. NHY ORO rumor control activities are to be carried out at the NHY ORO EOC under the supervision of the Public Information Advisor. The Public Information Advisor is responsible for coordinating rumor control measures. The process of utilizing the media and EBS to address rumors is specified. The Rumor Control Staff, 5 persons / shift, are responsible for interfacing with the public. The Rumor Control Staff reports to the NHY ORO EOC. The. Rumor Control Staff responds to public inquiries. The Rumor Control 1 Staff will use the official released information. If a caller's inquiry contradicts officially released information, the Rumor Control Staff provides correct information from the official information. If a caller's J

m y:% - ~.g .1 m ~, s. $.q'

3 f

pl:., r; p.:. s 9,7 1933; 44; 4 1 ce "yo

inquiry is not covered by. the official information, the Rumor Control Staff tg,

4 . is' instructed to respond as follows: do not know answer, offer to call back, i and refer the inquiry to the' Public Information Staff via Attachment 7 of - ~

6., 4 y

s llP.2.12. : Upon' receipt of completed and approved Attachment. 7, Rumor 3] *... Control and Response l form,' the Rumor Control Staff willimake the call D back. There is-a. Rumor Control Policy,DAttachment 1 of ;IP 2.12, that. ~ ! establishes the policy descr'ibed above. e Plan Reference = t G.4.c. Jection 3.7.3(C) and IP 2.12. 1 ,m Evaluation' 4 F, . g , G.4.c. Adequate. N 1 Evaluation Criteria. 1.. s: + - L G.51 The ofNsite' response organization shall conduct coordinated programs at 9

least annually. to acquaint news media with the offsite emergency plans,'

'information concerning radiation, and ' points of contact (see G.1.e.) for release of public information in an emergency.- Statement The Plan states that the NHY Massachusetts Emergency. Planning G.5. i Coordinator will. coordinate an annual med information program. The-i media information program willinclude Plan updates and media contacts at 'the Media Center. The media program will be carried out in conjunction with the Seabrook Station and the State of New Hampshire. u m Plan Reference G.5. Section 7.5.2 and Appendix C. a o l.N + Evaluation G.S. Adequate. lb r --a .,_..m

= - - -

- - - - -

c gwl

'Ja ys L g ;u a; 45-May 1988 ^ j f,; s y, IL Emergency Facilities and Eculpment (Planning Standard H): l Adequate [ emergency facilities and ' equipment to support the emergency response are ~ "n prcryided and maintained. s1 Evaluation Criteria t H.3. ?The offsite response organization shall establish' an emergency operations s 's. ^ center for use in directing and controlling offsite response functions. l: s E Statement. H.3. '- The NHY OR6EOC is located with the Seabrook Station EOF and the State - y of New Hampshire IFO on Gosling Road in Newington, New Hampshire'at the.'Newington Station Unit No. I facility. This facility is. located approximately 15 miles north of the Seabrook Stati:n. ' Plan Reference H.3.. . Section 5.2.1 and Figure b.2-2. Evaluation .H.3. Adequate. L Evaluation Criteria -H.4. The offsite response organization shall provide for timely activation and staffing of the facilities and centers described in the offsite plan. Statement t. H.4. NHY ORO will activate the EOC upon the declaration of an Alert or higher ECL. Upon the declaration of an Alert or higher ECL, the NHY ORO EOC will be activated (IP 3.1). The NHY Offsite Response Director will declare the NHY ORO EOC operational when the following group leaders / advisors inform him that they have determined that sufficient staffing exists for them to perform their functions: Radiological Health Officer, Public Notification Coordinator, Public Information Advisor, and the two Assistant Offsite Response Directors. The Support Services Coordinator is responsible for ensuring that the staff set up the NHY ORO EOC in accordance with Attachment 2 of IP 3.1. There are various functional l

==.. a

n 5J.

46 ,May 1953' C 4 x,; groups that are assigned to ' set up telephones; set _out sets.of plans and procedures; prearrang office supplies; and ensure : that photocopier is operational.. The Support Scrvices Coordinator'will ensure that sufficient resources (desks, chairs, etc.) exist and procure any additional equipment as 'necessary. The Support Service Coordinator will provide ' support. to responding organizations and Federal agencies including vehicles, food and lodging, and procurement support. The Security Officer is responsible for - establishing access control at the NHY ORO EOC, establishing a log of all - personnel admitted to the NHY ORO EOC, and maintaining security for the faculty. .e Staging Area (located at 145 Water Street in Haverhill, Massachusetts) is also to be activated at an Alert or higher classification. Emergency field workers are to be activated at the Site Area Emergency or higher. The Emergency Worker Facility (mobile trailer for monitoring and decontami-nating emergd$cy workers and vehicles) is to be set up at the' Staging Area at an Alert and is to be fully activated at the Site Area Emergency. A dedicated Monitoring Trailer (to monitor and decontaminate evacuees)is to be set up at each Reception Center and be fully activated at.the declaration of a Site Area Emergency. Two Reception Centers, to provide an assembly point and location for registering evacuees, will be established at locations about 20 miles from the Seabrook Station (one at 1101 Turnpike Street in North Andover, Massachusetts, and the second one at 44 River Street in Beverly, Massachusetts). The Reception Centers are to be activated at a Site Area Emergency classification and higher. Congregate Care Centers will be established at leased facilities, for which Letters of Agreement have been signed. These Centers are to be set up and staffed by the American Red Cross. The Congregate Care Centers will be activated at General Emergency. Plan Reference H.4. Section 5; IP 3.1; IP 3.2; IP 3.3; IP 3.4; and IP 3.5. Evaluation H.4. Adequate. t I o

y is ,J.* ,1 l' 147

May 1988'

-Z L ~ Evaluation Criteria - J, .H.7.. The offsite' response organization,'where appropriate, shall provide for p' ' offsite radiological monitoring equipment in the vicinity of the nuclear [ facility. . Statement - I H.7. 'NHY ORO has made provision for offsite radiological monitoring equipment for both environmental monitoring and for personnel exposure monitoring. Plan Reference >~ H.7. ' Section 3.3.2; Table 3.3-1; Section 5.2.4; and Appendix I. i 3 valuation, H.7. Adequate.. Evaluation Criteria H'.10. The offsite L response. organization shall make pro,lons ' to inspect, inventory and operationally check emergency equipment / instruments at least once each calendar quarter and after each use. There shall be sufficient reserves of instruments / equipment to replace those which are a removed from emergency kits for calibration or repair. Calibration of equipment shall be at intervals recommended by the supplier of the equipment. Statement H.10. NHY ORO has made provision to to inspect, inventory, and operationally check all emergency equipment quarterly and after each use. Radiological monitoring equipment and dosimetry is to be calibrated on a semiannual basis. Calibration of monitoring instruments will be done: (1) upon receipt j of new instruments, (2) after any repair, (3)in accordance with National c Standards or the ' manufacturer's recommendations, and (4)in accordance with - Seabrook Station policies. Operational checks on radiological monitoring equipment will be conducted monthly. NHY ORO has stated that they will make sufficient reserves of equipment available to replace equipment that is removed for calibration or repair. The Plan states that equipment can only be removed for repair and calibration when replacements are available.

p1 M e r. p- ,W fg' gay,1933-e Plan Reference N I,, H.10. ~ Section 5.5; Section 7.3; and IP 4.3. .) lN - Evaluation - L H.10.' Adequate. l Eviluation Criteria H.11. The offsite plan shall, in an' appendix, include identification of emergency kits by general. category - (protective equipment, communications . equipment, radiological monitoring equipment and emergency supplies). ' Statement H.11.. LThe Plan does no't contain lists of emergency kits according by the general-category specified in ' this criteria.- The Plan lists facility. equipment alphabetically with separate columns for quantitles of a given piece of. 'l equipment or supply located at a particular NHY ORO facility.' A separate list alphabetically tabulates supplies found'in the field team kits (separate columns. for field monitoring ' kits, environmental ! sampling kits, and environmental supply locker). Plan Reference n H.11. Appendix 1. Evaluation H.11. Adequate. -l .I Evaluation Criteria 'H.12. The offsite response organization shall establish a central point (preferably associated with the licensee's near-site Emergency Operations Facility), for - the receipt and analysis of all field monitoring data and coordination of sample media. l l -u____.____ m_ l

7 ',) ; ( t 2' 5 \\* f4 g ,(.' ,s-49; .May"19a3 ..f g, J j y;. l 1 "- Statement ..e ( H.12.. The'NHY OROlhas established the EOF as the central point for the receipt -j ~.! and analysis of all ~ field monitoring data'r and coordination of sample - l;' . media. - ~ . Plan Reference- ) ii i .H.12.' ' - Seetion 3.3.2.. -- Evaluation', H.12. ' Adequate. 7 ') .a t - 1] +

f.

r i -_..-a--- 6._.. mm. _ _.m ...m.,

o 50 'May 1933 Accident Assessment (Plarning Standard I): Adequate methods, systems and equipment for assessing and monitoring actual or 'l potential offsite consequences of a radiological emergency condition are in use. i Evaluation Criteria !.7. .The offsite response organization shall describe the capability and j resources for field monitoring within the plume exposure Emergency 1 Planning Zone which are an intrinsic part of the concept of operations for the facility. j l I Statement !.7. The NHY ORO capabilities and resources for field monitoring within the plume exposure EPZ are described in the plan and its accompanying j procedures. The Field Teams (2 teams at 2 persons per team) and Sample l Collection Teams (5 teams at 2 persons per team) report to the Field Team l Dispatcher. The Field Team Dispatcher and the Dose Assessment Technician report to the Accident Assessment Coordinator. The Accident Assessment Coordinator reports to the Radiological Health Advisor. The typical field monitoring kit inventory is listed in Table 3.3-1. The plan { indicates that each field monitoring team will be assigned a vehicle for transportation in the field. The field teams will use the same grid maps as y used by the State of New Hampshire and Seabrook Station. The field team monitoring kits contain instruments which are comparable to the survey instruments used by the State of New Hampshire and Seabrook Station. NHY ORO, Seabrook Station, and the State of New Hampshire have agreed to coordinate field monitoring activities. Therefore, the various organizations' field teams will receive specific assignments. The field survey data collected by the NHY ORO monitoring teams will be integrated with the data collected by the New Hampshire State and Seabrook Station j teams. Plan Reference 1.7. Section 3.3-2; Section 3.3-3; Section 3.9; Figure 2.1-1; Table 3.3-1; IP 1.12; IP 2.3; and IP 2.4. Evaluation I.7. Adequate.

$1 May 1933 Evaluation Criteria I. 8. The offsite response organization, where appropriate, shall provide methods, equipment and expertise to make rapid assessments of the actual or potential magnitude and locations of any radiological hazards through liquid or gaseous release pathways. This shell include activation, notification means, field team composition, transportation, communication, monitoring equipment and estimated deployment times. Statement I.8. The NHY ORO has made provision and developed methods, equipment, and expertise to make assessments of the magnitude and locations of radiological hasards through the gaseous release pathway. This includes activation, notification m eans, field team formation, transportation, com;nunications, monitoring equipment, and estimates of deployment times from the arrival at the Staging Area. Estimates of complete deployment time are included. IP. 2.3 describes duties, responsibilities, and the concept of operation for the Accident Assessment Coordinator, the Field Team Dispatcher, and the Field Monitoring Teams. The Accident Assessment Coordinator is responsible for implementing the procedure and supervising the Field Team Dispatcher. The Field Team Dispatcher is responsible for directing the Field Monitoring Teams including monitoring locations, recording field data, tracking Field Monitoring Team exposure, and relaying this data to the Accident Assessment Coordinator. The Field Monitoring Teams are responsible for performing monitoring surveys in the plume exposure EPZ, collecting samples, and monitoring / reporting their doses. The Field Monitoring Teams are responsible for plume definition: e.g., define plume boundary as 1 mrem /hr,100 mrem /hr, and highest centerline numbers. Note, the NHY ORO has adopted a turnback number of 500 mrem /hr. The Field Monitoring Teams are responsible for taking gamma and gamma / beta surveys at waist level, and gamma / beta surveys at two Inches above ground at each survey location. The Field Monitoring. Teams will be assigned to take air samples at various locations by the Field j Team Dispatcher. The Fleid Team Dispatcher will give assignments to the Field Monitoring Teams. The assignments will be to proceed between j various loculons, taking appropriate measurements, rather than to be j assigned to a general area: 1.e., management strategy is point-to-point monitoring. The Field Monitoring Teams kits have a map with a grid system for the plume exposure EPZ.

).p 52 May 1988 .}_ , Plan Reference !.8. Section 3.3.2; Section 3.9; Section 4.5; Table 3.3-1; Table 3.3-2; Appendix I: IP 1.2; IP 1.12; IP 2.1; IP 2.3; and IP 2.4. Evaluation I.8.- Adequate. 1 Evaluation Criteria 1.9.- The offsite response organization shall have a capability to detect and measure radioiddine concentrations in air in the plume exposure EPZ as low as 10"I 2Cl/ce.(mierecuries per cubic centimeter) underlfleid conditions. Interference from the presence of noble gas and background radiation shall not decrease the stated minimum detectable activity. Statement I. 9. NHY ORO hasi made provision for equipment and methods.to detect and ! measure radiolodine concentrations as low as 10-7 uCl/cc. The typical

{

' field monitoring kit inventory (Table 3.3-1) and the field monitoring kit i inventory and operational checklist (IP 2.3) shows air sampling equipment { and includes 25 silver zeolite cartridges. The procedure for air sampling l using the portable air sampler does not include purging of the cartridgu prior to counting. I Plan Reference i 1.9. Section 3.3.2; Table 3.3-1; IP 2.2; and IP 2.3. I Evaluation I. 9. Adequate. s i Evaluation Criteria ] I.10. The offsite response organization shall establish means 'or relating the various measured parameters (e.g., contamination levels, water and air activity levels) to dose rates for key isotopes (i.e., those given in Table 3, page 18 of NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1) and gross radioactivity measurements. Provisions shall be made for estimating integrated dose

y -K w hti, a si

p J#

$3; iMay 1938 o f g' from the projected and actual dose rates and for comparing these estimates l .with. the : protective action; guides. The detailed' provisions shall be y4 described in separate procedures.- Statement 11.10. IP. 2.2. describes duties for the Accident Assessment Coordinator and the Dose = Assessment Technician. The procedure describes the methodologies d Lused for predicting offsite doses, for calculating projected. iodine ground s G' ' deposition, and projected first-year integrated -whole body ~ dose from ^' radioactive deposition. Section 3.3'of the Plan states that the. Dose Assessment Technician is' to ~ p" . use the ' METPA,C data provided by NHY staff at the EOF. 'The type of ' information' that can be. ' btained from the METPAC printout includes, h% ' plume arrival time for downwind distances up to 10 miles, whole-body and o L ' thyroldfdose rate projections, atmospheric dispersion and plume depletion factors, and'whole body and thyroid integrated doses for 2, 4,6, or 8 hours [^ of exposure. IP 2.5 provides guidance for making PARS. The PAR procedure calls for-predetermined special pas at a Site Area Emergency or. General Emer-y genc'y. The predetermined special pas ares y

r c

Consider recommending early evacuation of schools; and r Closure of the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge on Plum. Island, Plum Island Beach, Salisbury Beach, and the ocean safety zone. 'The. Radiological Heal'th Advisor is responsible for implementing this . procedure. The Accident Assessment Coordinator is responsible for collecting and summarizing radiological and meteorological information. The Technical Advisor is responsible for collecting and summarizing data on the accident status and plant conditions, and providing this information to the Radiological Health Advisor for formulating a PAR. The Radiological Health Advisor checklist (IP 1.2) states that 'the Radiological Health ' Advisor is responsible for formulating precautionary PARS and PARS for both the plume and ingestion exposure pathways. The PAR m procedure indicates that the Technical Advisor will confer with the Radiological Health Advisor in developing a PAR (!P 2.5, sections 5.2.2, 5.4.1, and 5.4.3). The Technical Advisor checklist (IP 1.7) states that the Technical Advisor will develop PARS based upon plant status and advise the y Radiological Health Advisor of the need for PARS based on plant conditions. The Radiological Health Advisor checklist has a briefing sheet (Attach-ment 3 to IP 1.2) for the Radiological Health Advisor to complete and l au _=_______:_=________

p ,.e f - :e. u, 7-j IU.., Y ' [.,4f'.h t,h i 1 i't f' \\ p

54)

May '1988". c .'5 4 b g I' L! .,9.In i,, r J f.' ,f.' g, i;= 5 \\.*'. y Se i deliver' to the NH Offsite Response Director. This form has combinations" y r. of.noiaction,3 shelter,. evacuations and recovery for - e'ach of the ERPAsJ

within'the plu'me exposure EPZ.: This form also.contains an ingestion PAR 7'%~g 1.

'c, hand a section for recommending emergency worker exposure controls. The-L J' ingestion' PAR sections lacks any discussion of distance and direction or the type'of PAR to be considered (Preventive or Emergency). pg Plan 'Refere'nce 1.'10.' . Sectidn 3.2; Section 3.3; Section 3.9; IP 1.2; IP 1.7; IP 1.12; IP 2.2; IP 2.5; and IP 2.6. .. Evaluation - !.10. = Adequate. Evaluation Criteria - !.11.1 ' Arrangements to' locate and track the airborne radioactive plume'shall be; ~ made, using either or both Federal and offsite response organization - 6~ resources.: . Statement !.11. - . NHY ORO will provide two field monitoring teams with vehicles for ground transportation.1These teams, along with those of New Hampshire State and-Seabrook' Station', can be used for locating and tracking an airborne radioactive plume from the Tround. ' The Plan inc'icates that NHY ORO will ' request Federal assistance to perform aerial monitoring. Plan Reference 1.11. Section 2.3.2; Section 2.3.3; Section 3.3.2; IP 1.12; and IP 2.3. Evaluation 1.11. Adequate. 4 l I 4' 4 '. l I

rw

1.,

~ 55 May 1988' J. Pmtective Response (Planning Standard J): A range of protective actions have been developed for the plume exposure pathway-EPZ for emergency workers and the public. Guidelines for the choice of protective actions during an emergency, consistent with Federal guidance, are developed and in place, and protect,ve actions for the ingestion exposure pathway EPZ appropriate to' the locale have bee 1 developed. Evaluation Criteria J. 2.' Each' licensee and offsite response organization shall make provisions for evacuation routes and transportation for onsite individuals to some suitable offsite location, including alternatives for inclement weather, high t'ffic density and spepific radiological conditions. 4 Statement 'J.2. Evacuation of onsite personnel is incorporated into the Seabrook Station Evacuation Time Estimate and Traffic Management Plan Update. The Seabrook. Station is located in the State of New Hampshire. The onsite plan . calls for personnel to be evacuated to the State of New Hampshire. i Plan Reference J.2. Evacuation Time Estimate study. Evaluation J.2. Adequate /Not Appilcable. Evaluation Criteria J.9. The offsite response organization shall establish a capability for implementing protective measures based upon protective action guides and other criteria. The offsito response organization shall describe the means for recommending protective actions to the public, for activating the alert and notification system, and for notifying the public of protective action recommendations. This shall be consistent with the recommendations of EPA regarding exposure resulting from passage of radioactive airborne plumes, (EPA-520/1-75-001) and with those of DHHS/FDA regarding radioactive contamination of human food and animal feeds as published in the Federal Register on October 22,1982 (47 FR 47073). _ - = _ _ - -. _ _ _

56 May 1980 i Statement 1 J.9. The Plan describes the Massachusetts communities affected by the Seabrook Station plume exposure EPZ as follows: The land area is completely within Essex County, Commonwealth of Massachusetts. All land area is said to be under the jurisdiction of the following communities: Amesbury, Merrimac, Newbury, Newburyport, Salisbury, and West Newbury. A portion of Plum Island is under the jurisdiction of the DOI. The navigable waters of the Atlantic Ocean and the Merrimac River are under the jurisdiction of the USCG. The FAA maintains jurisdiction over the airspace within the plume exposure EPZ. Nota Portions of Plum Island outside of Newburyport (Rowley and Ipswich) are not included in Plume exposure EPZ. e The general public population is stated to be as follows: COMMUNITY PERMANENT PERMANENT & TRANS!ENT Amesbury 14,258 19,359 Merrimac 4,420 6,079 Newbury 5,479 10,476 Newburyport 16,414 23,481 Salisbury 6,726 18,919 West Newbu*.y 3,296 4,630 TOTAL POPULATION 50,593 82,944 i Portions of Salisbury and Amesbury are located within the two mile and five mile distance from the Seabrook Station in the S to the WSW compass sectors. Portions of Salisbury and Amesbury and all/most of Merrimac, West Newbury, Newburyport, and Newbury are located between the five and ten mile distance from the Seabrook Station in the S to the WSW compass sectors. The transient population mainly visits Salisbury Beach and beaches on Plum Island, which are located in Salisbury, Newbury, and Newburyport, as well as the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge, which is located in Newburyport, Rowley, and Ipswich. 1 The Seabrook Station Ingestion Exposure EPZ affects portions of the States of Maine and New Hampshire and portions of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The Plan identifies all or portions of the following Massachusetts Counties as being part of the Ingestion Exposure EPZ: Essex, Middlesex, Suffolk, Plymouth, Norfolk, and Worcester.

Q g 7, ~~ ~ 4 v gl w'" g, E' M - t 4 i*> $ k )h, '. " 5L May:1988-4 o o @ g ).1]f ' N [,*g . the Plume Exposure EPZ as follows: NHY; ORO has adopted the concept of ' operation for Protective Action in y p, T, L, I s'lSAE and GE ECL: Recommend that the DOI notify the transients at the Parker. River National' Wildlife Refuge tol leave. Recommend that the-y, 4,'y . u USCG establish a marine safety zone'(ocean safety zone). Recommend - ~ that Plum : Island Beach and Salisoury Beach be closedi Consider - m recommending 'early evacuation of schools or closing of' schools If they. 1 are not open. : C

GE' ECL:

Recommend combinations of shelter and L evacuation,. depending upon assessment of emergency, for the: general public and ~ Special Populations. Recommendations will be by ERPA. A recommen-R .dation will be made to place milk animals within 10 miles in shelter and ^ b@ i on stored f sed. ~ -NHY ORO has adopted the concept of operation for pas in the Ingestion - - Exposure.EPZ as follows: PREVENTIVE PROTECTIVE ACTIONS: Recommend pas if measured' contamination of food stuffs exceeds'the preventive derived response ' levels. EMERGENCY PROTECTIVE ACTIONS: Recommend pas ! if - the - measured contamination of foodstuffs exceeds the emergency derived

response levels.

Ey 4 NHY.ORO has adopted the concept of operation for pas for the Reentry and Recovery period as follows: recommend the designation of restricted zones, relocation of the general public, and decontamination campaigns. NHY ORO will base the Reentry and Recovery Protective Actions on the measurement of contamination that would result in the projected whole

e body dose exceeding the various relocation PAGs.

NHY ORO has established the capabilities for effecting the evacuation of the general public and Special Populations. NHY ORO has designated staff, g equipment, and resources to effect evacuation and to establish access control points (ACPs) for evacuated areas. NHY ORO will provide dosimetry and KI to those Special Populations who cannot evacuate. NHY ORO will assist the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in the implementation of Ingestion Exposure Pathway pas. The NHY Offsite Response Director has authority to purchase foodstuffs with contamination levels exceeding the emergency derived response levels. NHY ORO has made arrangements to notify the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the various local governments. NHY ORO has made arrangements to notify the public through the use of EBS. NHY ORO has -. =

58 May 1988 made arrangements to notify Special Populations (public and private schools, day care centers, nursing homes, hospitals, medical facilities, other special facilities, and hearing-impaired individuals). NHY ORO has made arrangements to notify the USCG, the FAA, and the DOI. The Plan describes a Vehicular Alert and Notification System that would be utilized to. alert the pubile. We note that the Vehicular Alert and Notification System is not available for use. NHY ORO has adopted the EPA PAGs for the general public and emergency i workers in the plume exposure EPZ. NHY ORO has adopted the FDA PAGs for-foodstuffs in the ingestion exposure EPZ. The NHY ORO PAGs are consistent with those of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the State of New Hampshire. NHY ORO has adopted the draft EPA PAGs for relocation. / i Plan Reference J.9. Section 3.3; Section 3.4; Section 3.5; Section 3.6; Section 3.7; Section 3.8; and Section 3.9. Evaluation J.9. Inadequate. Appropriate Alert and Notification systems have not been established. Evaluation Criteria J.10. The offsite response organization's plans to implement protective measures for the plume exposure pathway shall include: J.10.a. Maps showing evacuation routes, evacuation areas, preselected radiological sampling and monitoring points, relocation centers in host areas, and shelter areas (identification of radiological sampling and monitoring points shall include the designations in Table J-1 of NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1 or an equivalent uniform system described in the offsite plan); Statement J.10.a. A map titled " Plume Exposure EPZ" (Appendix A) shows evacuation areas and shelter areas of the six towns. Expanded maps of each town in Appendix J show evacuation routes, with traffic control points marked.

i 59 May 1988 A map of preselected radiological sampling and monitoring points was not j found. 'See Statement in 1.8. Plan Reference J.10.a. Appendix A and Appendix J. Evaluation J.10.a. Adequate. e Evaluation Criteria '^ L J.10.b. Maps showing population distribution around the nuclear facility. This shall be by evacuation areas (licensees shall also present the information in a sector format); Statement J.10.b. Population distribution around Seabrook Station is shown in tabular (rather than map) form for the six' towns in the plume exposure EPZ in Table 1.3-1 and Table 3.6-1.. Tables 1.3-1 and 3.6-1 gives figures.for " permanent residents" and " peak population total," defined as summer, midweek data. These figures are derived from the Seabrook Station Evacuation Time Study. 1 Plan Reference J.10.b. Table 1.3-1; Table 3.6-1; and ETE (Section 2 and Section 10). Evaluation i J.10.b. Adequate. 1 Evaluation Criteria - J.10.c. Means for notifying all segments of the transient and resident population; = = _ - _ ___ _ -

y, M, [], Mq W&# 60 May 1908 y& g w' g i y, w

.. s

),1; Statement ' 4 6 .s P,' W --J.10.c. .See comments under E.6. p $l & ' 4 .+ 3 -Plan Reference l.Q C % - ,J. J.10.c.. Section 3.2.5; Section 3.7.3; and IP 2.13.. y, q [i - Evaluation 'J.10.c. Inade'quate. Pending inst 61ation of the Vehicular Alert 'and Notification System and ' ~ development'of the route alerting procedure for the Parker River National E C ' Wildlife Refuge, this element is inadequate. Evaluation Criteria J.10.d. Means for protecting those persons whose mobility may be impaired due to .j such factors as institutional or other confinement. These means shall include notification, support and assistance _in implementing protective g. measures where appropriate; Statement The Evacuation Support. Coordinator is responsible for directing the J.10.d. functions of'the School Coordinator and Special Population Coordinators. The School Coordinator is responsible for directing the School Liaison and referring transportation requirements to the Bus Company Liaison. Each ~ School Liaison is responsible for notifying schools in the designated communities, relaying PARS to the schools, and informing the School Coordinator of transportation needs and the status of PA implementation. School Liaisons are also responsible for notifying schools outside the plume exposure EPZ that are attended by students living in the plume exposure EPZ. The Special Population Coordinator is responsible for directing the activities of the Special Population Liaisons, ensuring notifications of the hearing-tmpaired are made, referring bus requirements to the Bus Company z Liaison, and obtaining special vehicles (ambulances / wheelchair vans). l IP 2.7 provides guidance for notifying the Special Populations of J recommended pas and assessing transportation requirements. The Special Populations are defined as school children living and attending school in the plume exposure EPZ, school children living in the plume exposure EPZ and attending school outside the plume exposure EPZ, medically homebound s, individuals, hearing-tmpaired individuals, individuals in hospitals, and persons in other special care facilities. x m_m-___.___._

61 May 1988 The Special Vehicle Dispatchers are responsible for 9spatching ambulance / van drivers to various special facilities. The Dosimetry Recordkeepers will provide dosimetry to the Special Vehicle drivers. Appendix M indicates that there are needs for 81 wheelchair vans and ambulances and 20 buses to evacuate 2,593 persons plus staff who are either in special facilities and hospitals or who have mobility impairments. The Plan states that NHY ORO has the means for conducting simultaneous evacuation of all schools within the Massachusetts plume exposure EPZ. NHY ORO bus drivers will be briefed, issued dosimetry, and dispatched to appropriate schools. The NHY ORO does not rely on the school buses l routinely used by the school district. The plan makes provision to provide the means to communicate with the buses by issuing radios to the Route Guides, who will be assigned to the lead bus dispatched to each school.

of IP 2.7 is used by the School Liaison to notify schools, and to inform them of PARS. The attachment contains the PAR "nonopening/

cancellation" of school sessions and school related activities. Section 5.2.2 of IP 2.7 states that the School Coordinator requests buses from the Bus Company Liaison. The School Coordinator receives the bus needs from the six School Liaisons. Provision has been made for buses, vans, and ambulances to evacuate these individuals, for monitoring and decontamination, and for host facilities. Appendix M indicates that there are needs for 233 buses to evacuate 10,237 persons from schools. Special Population Liaisons are assigned to make notifications to the noninstitutionalized special population, including the hearing-impaired, and to special facilities other than schools. Route Guides at the Staging Area are to be available after declaration of a SAE for dispatch to the homes of the hearing-impaired to inform them of the need to take protective actions. Lists of persons with special needs are to be maintained via mail-in cards, posters, phone inquiries, and personal visits. These and other lists of special facilities are to be maintained in Appendix M. Maps to direct those assigned to evacuate special populations have been developed. Provisions have been made to store the maps at the Staging Area and to provide the maps to Route Guides. Plan Reference J.10.d. Section 3.6; IP 1.9; IP 1.10; IP 2.7; IP 2.10; IP 2.11; and Appendix M. l i l l 1

~ ( 62 May 1988 t Evaluation J.10.d. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria L J.10.e. Provisions for the use of radioprotective drugs, particularly for emergency workers and institutionalized persons within the plume exposure EPZ whose l immediate evacuation may be infeasible or very difficult, including quantitles, storage, and means of distribution; Statement J.10.e. KI tablets ar/to be issued along with dosimetry to emergency personnel who must enter the plume exposure EPZ. Dosimetry Recordkeepers are to deliver a set of dosimetry and KI to each bus driver at their respective bus yards. All other emergency workers at the Staging Area are to receive both dosimetry and KI. The NHY ORO will provide dosimetry and KI for institutionalized individuals who cannot be evacuated if requested by local emergency officials. Dosimetry Recordkeepers are to deliver 30 sets of dosimetry with KI to each local EOC. Append!x I, Inventory, indicates 1000 vials of KI. According to the Plan, following is a tabulation of the KI requirements: Category KI Units Route guides, Ambulance, Van, and Bus drivers 659 50 @ each local EOC for local government personnel 300 1 NiiY ORO staff at local EOCs 48 1 190 95 Traffic Cuides for ACP/TCPs 1 Field Teams 8 1 Sample Collection Teams 24 Transfer Points 24 { l 1 48 Road Crews Total 1,301 l i 1 Assumes two shifts for each position. x-.---

3g, [3 J63 May 1988-g*

Plan Reference 3:

g ?J.10.e. ' Section 3.5.4; Section 3.6.1; IP 2.8; and Appendix 1. Evaluation L J.10.e. Inadequate. According to,NHY, an adequate supply.of KI will be provided.' Evaluation Criteria. J.10.f. The; offsite respose organization's plans should include the-method by ~ which Ldecislo'ns by the - State Health Department for administering radioprotective drugs tof the general population can be made during an emergency. The plan shall adopt the method used by the State where such a method is available. The plans shall provide for advising. State Health. Departments' regarding such decisions; and the predetermined condition ' under which such drugs may be used by offsite emergency workers;l Statement' - J.10.f. NHY ORO has not made provisions for the distribution of K! to the general public, which is consistent with the Commonwealth of.' Massachusetts Radiological Emergency Response Plan. The predetermined condition level for K1 use by emergency workers is stated to be 25 rem. Plan Refer!.nce ' J.10.f. Section 3.5.4. Evaluation J.10.f. Adequate. ISee DHHS Federal Register notice of July 24,1985 (50 FR 30258) entitled Federal Policy'on Distribution of Potassium iodide Around Nuclear Power Sites for Use as a i Thyroid Blocking Agent. i

m

l.,. -

i 64~ May 1998 W' . Evaluation Criteria-J.10.g. Means of relocation: Statement-J.10.g. - The plan. (Section 3.6.1) describer, means' for relocation of. the general ~ public (via ' automobile), residens and transients requiring assistance (automobile or bus), Special Population /special facilities (bus, ambulance, or van), and schools (buses). The numbers of buses, ambulances, and vans required are tabulated in Appendix M. See comments under J.10.d. IP 1.3, 1.9, 1.10, 2.10, and 2.11 provide guidanc'e and control for i implementing evasuation protective actions. The Staging Area Leader is responsible 'for briefing personnel dispatched to bus yards. The Bus Company Liaison is responsible for obtaining buses to support the evacuation of general and Special Populations. The Bus Company Dispatchers,12 persons as stated in Figure 2.1-1, are responsible for _taking Bus Driver Packets to bus yards, briefing bus drivers, and overseeing the dispatch of buses. The Bus Company Dispatcher is to take Dosimetry Record Keepers to the assigned bus yards. Appendix M indicates that there are _16 bus companies. We could not determine how many bus yards there were. The Route Guide procedure (Attachment 3, IP 2.10) states that the Route Guides will report to the assigned bus yard with the Bus Company Dispatcher. The Special Vehicle Dispatcher is responsible for briefing ambulance / van drivers, assigning pickup points, and dispatching them from. the Staging Area. Transfer Point Dispatchers are responsible for assigning bus routes, assigning dosimetry to road crews, dispatching / briefing Route Guides and bus drivers who are assigned to Transfer Points. The Bus Company Liaison (1) is tasked to determine the availability of buses (16 bus companies), and the mobilization time. This information is to be recorded on Attachment 1 of IP 2.10. This form has the availability of equipment and the identified bus requirements by community for transient dependent, special facilities, and schools. When there are more bus companies and/or bus yards than Bus Dispatchers, IP 2.10 directs the Bus Company Liaison either to request buses from smaller bus companies to go i to designated bus yards for dispatch, or to request NHY ORO to provide additional Bus Dispatchers. The Bus Company Liaison must interface with the Special Population Coordinator and the School Coordinator in order to j determine the actual number of buses required for these groups of Special i Populations by community. l - The Route Guide procedure (Attachment 2, IP 2.10) calls for the Route Guides to check out radios in order to provide communications capabilities ~ for the buses. The staffing chart (Figure 2.1-1) indicates that 166 persons i l E-_ _. _}

T;n fi; ' ' e 7 n4 ^ 65I y.cy 1988; yg'%.<q m l./ 1 ((1 .are ' assigned duties as' Route Guides. ' These 166 Route" Guides have to? ? provide evacuation' assistance.to the, generalipublic, schools and special-facilities simultaneously. . The Route Guides : also are : assigned the - o -responsibility to notify the hearing-tmpaired individuals. ~l ) ' The' Transfer Point ~ Dispatchers will pick up rad!Es'and proceed to their ~ . predetermhed Transfer Point. The Transfer Point Dispatchers are also to-- pick up ene Agh radios to provide radios to the Road Crews (12). ~ ,s 4.- Transfer Point Dispatchers will brief bus drivers and Route Guides as they.

arrive at the transfer points. Bus drivers, Route Guides, aad buses will be-

~ assigned to specific routes. Appendix M indicates that 64 buses will be

?N assigned to :the Transfer Point ' Dispatches to. effecti transportation a'ssistance/ evacuation for 1,484 persons identified as transit-dependent.

4 o t ' Plan ' Reference J.10.g. -. IP'.1.3; IP 1.9; IP 1.10; IP 2.10; IP 2.11; Section 3.6; Appendix 1; Appendix M; M . and Evacuation Time Estimate study. i Evaluation 6.

J.10.g. - Adequa' te..

~ Evaluation Criteria i J.10.h... Relocation centers in host areas which are at least 5 miles, and preferably 10 miles, bevond the boundaries of the plume exposura emergency planning zone (see J.12.); Statement l . J.10.h. Two Reception Centers and Congregate Care Centers (some co-located) have been identified (Appendix C). All are at a distance of at least 5 miles, and most greater than 50 miles, beyond the boundaries of the plume exposure EPZ. According to ARC Form #3074, completed by NHY j personnel for each Congregate Care Center, the Congregate Care Centers y have space for 24,714 people. The Reception Centers will be managed by the NHY.ORO (Sectbn 5.2.7). The Congregate Care Centers will be managed by the American Red Cross (Section 5.2.9), but a discussion on February 23 1988 between TEMA staff and Red Cross Southern New England Territory staff indicated that the Red Cross is not prepared to set c up, staff, or operate them. 1 l

E -T 66 May 1988 Maps directing the public from the Reception Centers to the Congregate - ( Care Centers have been developed. Provisions have been made to store the 'i maps at.the Reception Centers and to provide for the ' distribution of the 1 appropriate maps to evacuees requiring congregate care, f . A generic plan for Congregate Care Center setup has been developed.. j y 3 'i Plan Reference .J q I J.10.h. Section 3.6; Section 5.2.7; Section 5.2.9; IP 1.6; and IP 3.5. 1 Evaluatloa J.10.h.. Inadequate. The American Red Cross is not prepared to set up, staff, and operate the Congregate Care Centers. Steps have been added to the Procedure for the Assistant Reception Center Coordinator-(IP 1.6) to ensure coordination with the American Red Cross at the New Hampshire incident Field Office. - Evaluation Criteria J.10.1.. Projected traffic capacities of evacuation routes under emergency conditions; Statement J.10.1. The Seabrook Station Evacuation Timo Study describes the method used to estimate traffic capacities of evacuation routes (ETE, Section 3) and lists the estimated values of capacity for each route segment under fair weather conditions (ETE, Appendix N). For inclement weather, capacity reductions of 20 percent for rain and 25 percent for snow are used (ETE, p. 3-11). . Plan Reference J.10.1. Evacuation Time Estimate study. I l' l l ll

.l 67 May 1908 Evaluation 1 ' J.10.i.. Adequate. ] l Evaluation Criteria J.10.J. Control of access to evacuated areas and o.ganization responsibilities for such control Statement. J 10.J. The following statements are based on our review of IP 2.11, Appendix J of the Plan, and the ETE. NHY ORO will esta$lish Traffic Control Points (TCPs) and Access Control l Points (ACPs) (Section 3.6.5). Detailed sketches of each TCP and ACP are included in the plan (Appendix J, Traffic Management Manual). The listed ACPs are all on the periphery of the EPZ. Specific internal TCPs are designated as internal ACPs. There is mention in Appendix J of the " Diversion Route" described in the ETE (pp. 9-1 and 9-2) at a distance farther from the plume exposure EPZ 'l than the ACP cordon. l 1 i A summary of the required equipment is as follows: Total Require-Current Surplus Item TCP ACP Other ments Inventerv* (Deficit) Cones 379 130 150 659 555 (104) Barricades 73 18 100 191 105 (86) I Flashing 1.ight ' 199 61 150 410 135 (275)

Appendix I (Inventory)

) i Flan Reference ] i J.10.J. Section 3.6.5; IP 2.11; Appendix I; Appendix J; and ETE study. j l

N,, p 63 May 1933' r l Evaluation - J.10.J. Inadequate. insufficient numbers of cones, barricades, and flashing lights were observe'd A by FEMA staff at the Staging Area on February 24,1988. Evaluation Criteris o _ J.10.k. ' Identification of and means for' dealing with potential impediments (e.g., if seasonal impassability of roads) to. use of evacuation routes,.and contingency measures; Statement J.10.k. NHY ORO will' preposition 12 road crews at 6 Transfer Points to clear road impediments and ensure that roads remain passable (Section 3.6.5). Traffic guides will be stationed at predetermined TCPs to expedite the flow of traffic. If alternative evacuation routes become necessary, Traffic Guides will be repositioned by the Evacuation Support Dispatcher (Section 3.6.5, IP 1.3, IP 2.10, and Appendix J). See statement under J.10.1. Appendix M (p. M-134) lists six road crew companies. A review of Appendix M Indicates a total towing inventory of 31 vehicles. 1: Plan Reference J.10.k. Section.3.6.5; IP 1.3; IP 2.10; Appendix J; and Appendix M. Evaluatien J.10.k.. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria J.10.1. Time estimates for evacuation of various sectors tnd distances based on a dynamic analysis (time-motion study under various conditions) for the plume exposure pathway emergency planning zone (see Appendix 4, NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1); and l i ____.-.1.1._._m__

p 69 May 1988 Statement J.10.1. An evacuation time study was performed for the entire plume exposure EPZ, including the six Massachusetts communities, Seabrook Station Evacuation Time Estimate Study (ETE). In the ETE, two Emergency Response Planning Areas (ERPAs) were defined to include the six Massachusetts communities: ERPA B, comprising Amesbury and Salisbury; and ERPA E, comprising Merrimac, Newbury, Newburyport, and West Newbury. Evacuation time estimates were calculated for these ERPAs. Although we located separate estimates for the Massachusetts beaches (ETE Table 10-9, p.10-11), these are not embodied in the relevant procedure for determining PARS (IP 2.5, ). Furthermore, we could not determine whether the evacuation time estimate included the entire Parker River National Wildlife Refuge in fts demand estimate and evacuation time estimate for Plum Island. We could not locate an evacuation time estimate for boaters. The overall evacuation time estimates for ERPAs B and E include the evacuation time estimates for transit-depenraent and special facility populations. Appendix 4 to NUREG 0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1 calls for both demand estimates and evacuation time estimates to be computed on a facility-by-facility basis. l IP 2.10 (Attachment 2) assigns priorities for evacuating special facilities. We could not locate in the Plan the methodology used to assign those priorities. NHY indicated during conversations with FEMA staff that the following methodology was used to assign priorities: schools were prioritized strictly based on distance from Seabrook Station. The hospitals were all considered high priority, both because there are only two, and because of the critier.lity of their population. The priorities were established on a town-specific basis, whereby each town has several ) priority levels, from highest (1) to lowest (4). However, individual evacuation time estimates for these fac.!11 ties were not included in the methodology for determining these priorities. We note that NHY ORO will consider recommending early evacuation of schools or closing of schools if they are not open at both a SAE and GE ECL. Traffic management and access control strategies were developed and based upon the ETE and are addressed in IP 110 and Appendix J. The ETE (pp.12-3 to 12-5) specifies a traffic impediment strategy that calls for placing tow trucks on the perimeter of the plume EPZ plus one location in Amesbury. The Traffic Management Plan (Appendix J and IP 2.10) specifies that tow trucks (road crews) are to be stationed at the transfer points. Only one of the transfer points (Merrimac) appears to be close to the recommended tow truck locations specified in the ETE (Table 12-1, p.12-5, No. 11). Therefore, we could not determine the effect of the

,. s l 1 70 May 1980 j J L placement of road crews upon the capability to remove traffic ' impediments ) because.. four of the five transfer points do not coincide with the i recommended tow truck locations.. l i The ETE specifies a strategy for providing transportation assistance to the transient dependent persons. This strategy specifies certain transfer point locations which may be different from those specified by the NHY ORO transportation plan (IP 2.10). Because different transfer point locations are used, the route travel times n.ee no longer consistent with the ETE strategy j (comparison of Table 11-8A, ETE, and Attachment 9, IP 2.10). l We note that NHY has assigned 51 buses to run the 26 bus routes and 13 buses to move people from the transfer points to the relocation centers. The Plan has committed 9 mor' buses (13 versus 4) than specified e in the ETE at the transfer points and the same number of buscs to the 26 bus routes. Therefore, the Plan provides greater capabilities to evacuate j transit dependent persons from the transfer points. However, we could not~ determine whether those additional capabilities compensate for the selection of different transfer points than those specified in the ETE. ) I Plan Reference J.10.1. IP 1.3; IP 2.10; Appendix J; and ETE. Evaluation J.10.1. Inadequate. We could not locate the evacuation time estimates for special facilities on a facility-by-facility basis. Individual evacuation time estimates for special facilities were not included in the methodology for determining the priorities according to which they would be evacuated. We could not determine whether the additional capabilities identified in the j Plan for evacuating the transit-dependent population compensate for the selection of different transfer points from those specified in the ETE. j We could not determine the effect of the placement of road crews upon the j capabilliy to remove traffic impediments. l s-

b I 71 May 1938 Evaluation Criteria J.10.m. The basis for the choice of recommended protective actions from the plume exposure pathway during emergency conditions. This shall include expected local protection afforded in residential units or other shelter for direct and inhalation exposure, as well as evacuation time estimates.- Statement J.10.m. The Plan describes a PAR process based on both plant status and dose projections. Field measurements are inputted as they become available in order to refine PARS. The EPA Protective Action Guides (PAGs) are used as a basis for selecting protective actions for the plume exposure pathway. The METPAC program used for dose projection contains shelter protection factors 'or a wood frame house without a basement, used in both whole-body and thyroid dose calculations (p. 3.3-6). Plan Reference J.10. m. Section 3.3; Section 3.4; IP 1,2; IP 1,7; IP 2.5; and Evacuation Time Estimate study. Evaluation J.10. m. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria l J.11. The offsite response organization shall specify the protective measures to be used for the ingestion pathway, including the methods for paotecting the public from consumption of contaminated foodstuffs. This shall include 2The fo: lowing reports may be considered in determining protection afforded. (1) "Public Protection Strategies for Potential Nuclear Reactor Accidents " Sheltering Concepts with Existing Public and Private Structures" (SAND 77-1725), Sandia Laboratory. (2) " Examination of Offsite Radiological Eraergency Measures for Nuclear Reactor Accidents Involving Core Melt"(SAND 78-0454), Sandia Laboratory. (3) " Protective Action Evaluation Part II, Evacuation and Sheltering as Protective Actions Against Nuclear Accidents Involving Gaseous Releases" (EPA 520/1-78-001B). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

72 u.ay 1988 criteria' for deciding wh' ether dairy animals should be put on stored feed. The offsite plan snall identify procedures for detecting contamination. for estimating the dose commitment consequences of uncontrolled ingestion, and for imposing protection procedures such as impoundment, decontamina-tion, processing, decay, product diversion, and preservation. Maps for recording survey and monitoring data, key land use data (e.g., farming), dafries, food processing plants, water sheds, water supply intake and - treatment plants and reservoirs shall be maintained. Provisions for maps showing detailed crop information may be by including reference to their availability and location and a plan for their use. The maps shall start at the facility and include all of the 50-mile ingestion pathway EPZ. Up to-date lists of the name and location of all facilities which regularly process ) milk products and other large amounts of food or agricultural products originating in the ingestion pathway Emergency Planning Zone, but located 4 elsewhere, shall be gaintained. Statement J.11. NHY ORO will repest that the Massachusetts Department of Food and Agriculture, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the FDA implement ingestion exposure pathway pas. NHY ORO has identified procedures for detecting contamination from the l quantitative field data collected by Sample Collection Teams and/or Field Monitoring Teams, and from laboratory analysis of the field samples. NHY ORO has procedures for developing Preventive and Emergency PARS. Preventive PARS are based on projected deposition patterns and Emergency PARS are based on the results of the laboratory analysis of the field samples. IP 2.6 contains two worksheets for calculatir; whether protective actions are called for (Attachment 2 for milk and drinking water; for other foods). IP 2.6 also contains attachments with preventive (#3) and emergency (#4) pas. NHY ORO has adopted the concept of operation for pas in the Ingestion Exposure EPZ as follows: PREVENTIVE PROTECTIVE ACTIONS: Recommend pas if the mehsured contamination of foodstuffs exceeds the preventive derived response levels. EMERGENCY PROTECTIVE ACTIONS: Recommend pas if the measured contamination of foodstuffs exceeds the emergency c.erived response levels. 4 The Plan in Section 3.4.2 provides for ingestion PARS and pas to be communicated to the general public and food processors by means of news releases and EBS message. IP 2.6 assigns the Radiological Health Advisor f i I

m-,.- f,q, i 7 73: May 1988 q) p-K the responsibility toe assist in the - development of. appropriate news-L' releases. ~'After recommending an ingestion exposure pathway PAR, the NHY Offsite Response Director will direct the Public Information Advisor 3 ' to developa news. release. After authorization from the. Commonwealth. the Public Information Advisor will be instructed to issue the news release, f, l IP 2.6 c:rects the NHY Offsite Response Director, upon authorization from f the Commonwealth, to' instruct the Radiological Health Advisor to begin I" contacting farms and food processors affected; by the pas. The Plan references t!1e process to provide written public instructions material to be. 1 directed at farmers, farm workers, food processors, and distributors within L the ingestion exposure EPZ. The ingestion pathway database (Appendix L) does not contain appropriate information ~ for accident assessment and implementation of ingestion pathway pas. -FfMA staff reviewed the material that is being,4ced in a computerized data base. FEMA staff reviewed the format or the data base..' FEMA staff reviewed sample outputs of the data base. The reporting ' formats (outputs) and data ' base will provide for complete coverage of ingestion pathways within the Massachusetts portion of the Seabrook ingestion exposure EPZ.- IP 2.4 establishes guidelines for the Sample Collection Teams (SCT) to e follow in the collection of water, snow, milk, vegetation, meats and meat products, eggs, soll, ft/ trops, and shellfish. Sample Collection Teams - will'be directed by the s :,sident Assessment Coordinator through the Field Team Dispatcher. Figure 2.1-1 Indicates that there are 12 persons (6 teams). There are 6 team kits. The Plan (Section 3.3) states that there are 5 Sample Collection Teams. The sixth team will be used to collect aamples and transfer them to collection points (EOF). Sample Collection Teams are directed to'take gamma and gamma / beta - surveys at waist height at each sample location. Samp!e Collection Teams are directed to take gamma / beta surveys at two inches above grornd at each sample location. The Sample Collection Teams have USGS maps for the ingestion exposure EPZ and maps for the plume exposure EPZ. A grid j system is used ior both maps. There are various procedures for the different types of samples. The milk sampling procec ure includes the required collection of necessary information on feeding protocol, volumes of milk in tanks from which the sample was taken, and times at which milk was added to the tank relative to the time of the accident. The procedure calls for the Sample Collection Team to complete Attachment 5. Provisions have been made for maintaining maps for recording survey and monitoring data, key land use data, dairies, etc. at the NHY ORO EOC. l l 1 c J l

~ ( 4 (' l. w May 198a ] 74 ~ w, + 8 y o;', j w Plan Reference - H J.11.. ' Section'3.3; 'lon 3.4.2; Section 5.2.1; Table 2.2-1; IP 2.4; !P 2.6; !P 2.12; IP 2.13; Appendix L; and Appendix H.' .y L i Evaluation-s T l J.11.' l'nadequate. The ' existing data base (Appendix L) for the ingestion exposure EPZ is-e Inadequate. The' material that is being placed in the data base will provide j c. [ for. complete coverag'e of ingestion pathways within: the -Massachusetts L; l portion of the Seabrook ingestion exposure EPZ. 1 I Evaluation -Criteria J.12. The offsite response organization shall describe the means for registering and monitoring.of. evacuees at relocation centers in host areas. The personnel and equipment available shall be. capable of monitoring within-about 'a 12-hour period all residents and transients in the plume exposure EPZ arriving at relocation centers. v - Statement ~J.12.' -NHY ORO will use mobile Monitoring Trailers at each Reception Center. All arriving persons must process through the Monitoring Trailer. Each . Monitoring Trailer has '14 monitoring stations. The plan indicates tha' additional monitoring capability is available to NHY ORO from Yankee Atomic' Electric Company, other New England utilities, and Federal resources. There are procedures' for decontamination of evacuees in the plan. The layout of the Monitoring Trailers shows that each Monitoring Trailer has a decontamination area with a double sink and two decontamination showers. The Monitoring Teams are assigned to the Reception Centers (2) teams at 30 persons per team). Each Monitoring Team reports to a tes:n leader (2). The ' Monitoring Team Leaders (2) report to the Radiological Health Advisor. IP 2.9 calls for the use of the FT126B instrument for initial monitoring and the-HP210 instrument for monitoring after decontamination. The contamination level for personnel and equipment is 600 cpm above background. The NHY ORO has made provisions to deal with contaminated clothing, personal articles, and wastewater. The Plan states that the NHY i._m_w___.E _,_m.m..

7 L 75 May ;988 r ORO monitoring productivity is 16,600 persons in 12 hours (both Reception Centers). A radiological screening program established.to determine whether contaminated persons need further F.d! cal evaluation. A person enters the program when contamination of b. or her hair or skin surface cannot be removed af ter three dec...6..muodon attempts, or if he or she hi.s external contamination greater than 6,000 cpm above background. The Radiological Health Advisor is responsible for all following actions (e.g., bioassays or whole body counts). The Receptio t Center Coordinator / Assistant Reception Center Coordinator are responsible for activating and operating the two Reception Centers. reuniting evacuees with their families, tracking the number of evacuees reporting to each c$nter and directing evacuees to appropriate Jongregste Care Centers operated by the American Red Cross (ARC). The Reception Center Coordinator will notify the ARC and Congregate Care Centers at Alert. They will inform the ARC and Congregate Care Center of the emergency status and assess availability of staff and - facilities. The Reception Centers will be activated at SAE. The Congregate Care Centers will be activated at GE. The Reception Center Coordinator will notify the Public Information Advisor of the locations of the Congregate Care Centers that shou}d be included in the news releases. This information is not included in the EBS. The Reception Center Leaders are responsible for the activation, operation, and deactivation of the Reception Centers. Each Reception ) Center has I leader and 17 staff persons. All evacuees must be processed through the moritoring and decontamination process before they can gain access to the reception center via the issuance of a clean tag (Attach-ment 3 of IP 2.9). The monitoring and decontamination staff do issue the clean tags. There are two security staff assigned to the reception center. ] The Re<:eption Center Liaison is to assign a staff person to perform a security tection at the ingress and egress points to the Reception Center. There ere two staff assigned to the function of directing traffic in the parking lots. The Monitoring and Decontamination operation has staff assigned to monitor vehicles. The evacuees, once they have been issued a clear. tag, will proceed to the registration area. The registration form (Attachment 7 of IP 3.5) contains an area for name, resident address, persons living in your home, and the temporary shelter location. The evacuees have the option of completing a message form (Attachment 10 of IP 3.5). The Reception Center staff will complete the message log (Attachment 11 of IP 3.5) and post the log for arriving evacuees to see. When persons request to see the message, after receiving appropriate identification, the staff will deliver the message. l j

m.: p..: . l.- 76 May 1988-t l y\\ -J i- - Plan Reference ) -j i-a J.12. Section 3.5.3; Section 5.2.7; IP 2.9, IP 3.4; and IP 3.5. Evaluation 4 J.12. Adequate. l 1 m._.-

o 1 r 4 77 May 1933 l o [ K. radiological Exposure Control (Plannlitg Standard E): Means' lor controlling radiological exposures, in an emergency, are established fer. . emergency workers. The means for controlling radiological exposures shall include exposure guidelines consistent with EPA Emergency Worker and Lifesaving Activity Protective Action Guides.. Evaluation Criteria 'E.3.a. The offsite response organization shall make provision for 24-hour-per-day capability - to ' determine the. doses received by emergency personnel involved in any nuclear. accident, including volunteers. They shall also j make provisions for distribution of dosimeters, both self-reading and f ' permanent record dg,vicer. Statement. K.3.a. NHY ORO has made provisions to determine doses received by NHY ORO emergency personnel. Provisions have been made for distribution of both . direct reading dosimeters and permanent record devices Nr emergency workers. Emergency Workers are responsible for monitoring & 4 recording I ' their own exposure. There are administrative reporting levels, he reports will be used by the Exposure Control Coordinator to trach the exposures received by NHY ORO personnel. Each emergrecy worker (as defined in the plan] is to be provided with one. thermoluminescent-dosimeter and two direct-reading dosimeters (0-200 mrem, and 0-20 re m), except for menitoring/ decontamination personnel assigned to the monitoring trailers and EWF, who are to receive a 0-200 mrem dosimeter and a TLD. The TLD will provide the official radiation exposure to be recorded on the emergency worker's permanent record. The Transfer Point Dispatchers, Traffic Guides, Local EOC Liaisons, Special Population

Liaisons, School Liaisons, Ambulance Drivers, Monitoring / Decontamination Personnel, Fleid Monitoring Teams, and Sample Collection Teams are to receive dosimetry from Dosimetry Recordkeepers at the Staging Area. Bus Drivers are to receive dosimetry from the Bus Dispatchers who, assisted by Desimetry Recordkeepers, are to deliver and distribute dosimetry at the bus yards prior to the dispatch of buses. The Local EOC Liaisons and Dosimetry Recordkeepers are to take dosimetry to the local EOCs for distribution to the local emergency workers if needed. Transfer Point Dispatchers are to take dosimetry to the Transfer Points for distribution to the Road Crews and if necessary Snow Removal Crews.

78 May 1983 1 + i There are Dosimetry Recordkeepers assigned to maintain dosimetry records. for emergency ~ workers. The Dosimetry Record. Keepers' report to the Exposure Control Coordinator. The Exposure Control Coordinator. reports to thel Radiological Health ' Advisor. The Exposure Control Coordinator ' assigns Dosimetry Recordkeepers to each m'onitoring/decon team (3. teams ff } f with 35 sets of dosimetry), and one or two-Dosimetry Recordkeepers to bus q . yards _ (take enough. dosimetry sets for 'each bus driver). The Dosimetry i Recordkeepers are responsible for briefing the emergency workers and ' distributing the dosimetry and KI. If directed, the Dosimetry Record-keepers will deploy'_ to the ACPs (14 ACP points) with an unspecified .} number ' f sets of dosimetry. No KI is taken to the ACPs. The Exposure o Control Coordinator assigns six Dosimetry Recordkeepers to the six local EOCs (50 dosimetry sets. per EOC). The remaining Dosimetry Recordkeepers stay in the Staging Area for assignment. l The current procedbres call for 50 sets of dosimetry and Ki for each EOC and 190 sets of Dosimetry and K! to the ACPs,659 sets of dosimetry and K! d for' Route-Guides, bus, van, and ambulance drivers, assuming a staffing level ~of two shifts for Route Guides and for Traffic Guides at tne ACPs. In addition,' 32 dosimetry sets are distributed to field and sample collection teams (two shifts),' 146 dosimetry sets are distributed to monitoring and decontamination staff (two shifts), 24 dosimetry sets to transfer point ~ dispatchers (two shifts), 48 dosimetry sets to road' crews (two shifts), and 48 dosimetry sets are distributed to NHY ORO staff at local EOCs (two shifts). The total requirement, based upon the above, is 1,447 sets of dosimetry. The inventory (Appendix I) indicates 1,250 TLDs,1,975 sets dosimeters of 0-20 rem and 0-200 mrem. Plan Reference i a: K.3.a. Section 3.5.2; Section 3.6.5; and IP 2.8.

e. 'aluation l

'4.3.a. Inadequate. l Inadequate quantities of dosimetry. H C_m___..___ __m__

.C 79-May 1988

. Evaluation Criteria" K.3.b.- 'The offsite response organization shall ensure that dosimeters are read at appropriate frequencies end provide.for maintaining dose records for emergency workers involved in any nuclear accident.' L Statement K.3.b. .NHY ORO Emergency Workers have been trained to read the direct-reading dosimeters at frequent intervals while performing their emergency duties.. The term " frequent intervals" has been specified in emergency worker training as "approximately every 15 minutes." The TLD will provide the i I officiali radiation exposure to be recorded on the emergency worker's permanent record.) Dosimetry Recordkeepers will maintain dosimetry records for emergency workers.on forms for a shift basis. Emergency personnel are responsible for monitoring and recording their own exposure while in the field, and for notifying their appropriate contact point if . exposure reporting levels are reached. The procedures require emergency workers to record their own readings on work sheets. The various forms - provided to N EW allow them to log and track their dose. Plan Reference K.3.b. Section 3.5.2; and IP 2.8. Evaluation K.3.b. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria ~K.4. The offsite response organization shall establish the decision chain for authorizing emergency workers to incur exposures in excess of the EPA General Public Protective Action Guides (i.e., EPA PAGs for emergency workers and lifesaving activities). . Statement K.4. The NHY ORO has established criteria and set up a decision chain for authorizing emergency worker exposures. The plan indicates that the exposure limits adopted by the NHY ORO are the emergency worker whole-body exposure PAGs established by the EPA. The NHY ORO has established various administrative limits between 5 rem and 25 mrem with _j

80 "oy 1988 the objective of limiting the number of emergency workers who may reach 25 rem. The Exposure Control Coordinator, the Radiological Health i Advisor, and the NHY Offsite Response Director are responsible for I exposure control decisions affecting all' emergency workers, according to the plan. The Exposure Control Coordinator (or, for the field teams, the Accident Assessment Coordinator) approves exposures up to 5 rem; the Radiological Health Adviser approves exposares from 5 rem to 25 rem; and f the NHY Offsite Response Director approves exposures beyond 25 rem for l lifesaving missions. NHY ORO staff qualifications, as specified in the plan, do assure that there will be an individual ir. the decision chain suitably qualified to authorize exposures in excess of the EPA general public PAGs. Plan Reference K.4. Section 3.5.2; Table 3.5-1; IP 1.1; IP 1.2; IP 1.12; and IP 2.8. Evaluation K.4. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria I K.S.a. The offsite response organization, as appropriate, shall specify action levels for determining the need for decontamination. Statement I K.5.a. NHY ORO has specified action levels for determining the need for decontamination. For emergency workers, areas of the body, personal I articles and equipment will be considered contaminated if the detected levels exceed 600 cpm above a normal background. The procedures specify the use of the APTEC FT1268 probe, which is a large area (126 sq cm) detector and count rate meter. A Personnel Monitoring Team are assigned to the EWF (13 persons). The Personnel Monitoring Team reports to its team leader. The Monitoring Team leader reports to the Radiological Health Advisor. The trigger levels for enrolling emergency workers in the radiological screening program are when an individual receives 5 rem or greater whole body exposure, when an individual is suspected of having internal contamination, or when an individual has external contamination greatt.r than f,000 cpm above background. L-___ __

y ;= - .N y L 81! ' 'May'1938 ". *J 1 e> ' V- ~ Plan Refetence H' =K.S.a. LSection 3i3.2; IP 1.ii and IP 2.9. - ^ r m L' Evaluation - K.S.a.- Adequate. ~ la' Evaluation Cr'iteria. i i . K.5.b.- The 'offsite response' organization, as appropriate, shall establish the means ' 1 for. radiological decontamination of emergency personnel wounds, supplies, = instruments and equipment, and for waste disposal. p Statement j

K.5.b'..; 1The plan has established: means for radiological decontamination ' of emergency.: personnel, including emergency. workers with contaminated wounds; personal articles and equipment. The policy is to address medical needs before d, contamination issues. Arrangements have been made for

- the disposal of contaminated waste if it is above the 10 CFR 20 limit. Plan Reference-K.5.b. Section 3.5.2 and IP 2.9. Evaluation. K.S.b. Adequate. n l e ~ .m____

,y .k: iflq ~ (y .j i s82' ty 1988 N Q4 - 4

gn-l m

' "w" " g" Lh. Medicdl and Pu'blic Health Support (Planning Standard L): l arrangements are made for medical services for contaminated injured individuals.1 ) ~ A j +. I Evaluation Criteria. 7 .y I 'Thef offsite respon' e Organization shall ~ arrange ' for local and' backup L.1. - s . hospital" and medicrl services -having the Leapability -' for. evaluation' of radiation exposure.and uptake, including assurance that persons providing e these services are adequately prepared to handle contaminated individuals. H N iStatementL w

\\

L.1. Letters of Agreement have been signed between New Hampshire Yankee l andt support : hospitals outside the Plume Exposure EPZ that will treat 1 contam.inated, Injured-or ' overexposed individuals. Both 'a primary and y backup hospital are listed. ? Plan Reference

L.1.~

Section 3.8.1 and Appendix C. 9 Evaluttlon L.lb 1 Adequat'.- e Evaluation Criteria L.3.

The offsite response organization shall develcp lists. indicating the location

'q ] of public, private and military hospitals and other emergency medical j y services facilities within the State or contiguous States considered capable i of providing medical support for any contaminated injured individual. The l !! sting shall include the name, location, type of facility and capacities and any'special radiological capabilities. These emergency medical services IThe availability of an integrated emergency medical services system and a public health ) emergency plan serving the area in which the facility is located and, as a minimum, equivalent to the Public Health Service Guide for Developing Health Disaster Plans, 1974, and.to the requirements of an emergency medical services system as outlined in the; Emergency -Medical-Services System Act of 1973 (PL 93-154 and amendments in ] 1979 PL 96-142), should be part of and consistent with overall State or local disaster l ' control plants and should be compatible with the specific overall'emegency response L plans for the faellity.

m - -] n. .83 May 1988 a .,e . should be.able to radiolopeally monitor contamination personnel, and have

{

facilities and trained personnel able to care for contaminated injured l persons.. l l Statement. L.3. - The Plan contains a list of hospitals with appropriate information. T Plan Rderence L.3. Section 3.8.1; Appendix C; and Appendix M. . Evaluation L.3. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria'. L.4. The offsite response organization shall arrange for transporting victims of -radiological accidents to medical support facilities. Statement .L.4.. NHY ORO has made provisions for the transportation of injured contaminated or' overexposed individuals from a. Reception Center or the Emergency Worker Facility to a designated hospital. One ambulance will . be kept at each Reception Center. NHY Offsite Response staff vehicles may also be used, if necessary. Plan Reference L.4. Section 3.8.1. Evaluation L.4. Adequate. 1 [.

84 May 1988 ~ Recovery d Reentry Planning and Postaccident Operations (Planning Standard M): M. General plans for recovery and reentry are developed. Evaluation Criteria l M.1. The offsite response organization, as appropriate, shall develop general plans and procedures for reentry and recovery and describe the means by which decisions to relax protective measures (e.g., allow reentry into an evacuated area) are reached. This process should consider both existing and potential conditions. 4 l Statement M.I. NHY ORO has developed general plans and procedures for reentry and recovery. The plan describes means by which decisions to relax protective measures will be reached, including field surveys, sample collection and analysis, and interpretation of results. This process considers both existing conditions and potential changes in conditions. The plan cites the EPA draf t relocation PAGs as criteria to be used (Table 3.9-1). The Plan contains a statement that the NHY Offsite Response Director, through the Assistant Offsite Response Director, Support Llaison, will request guidance from the State or local government as to whom should be allowed to reenter an evacuated or restricted area. Plan Reference M.1. Section 3.5; Section 3.9; Table 3.9-1; and Appendix J. Evaluation M.1. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria M.3. The offsite plan shall specify means for informing members of the offsite response organization that a recovery operation is to be initiated, and of any changes in the organizational structure that may occur. i l t 1

FF, ' ;}} a y, q m ..g 85 May>1988' ,;g_ .. m ~ ,4: l,; ~ " / 't Statement - - M.3. - Members'of ths NHY ORO are to be informed of recovery operations by Q, "4 ~ emergency communications which have' been operational: throughout the - emergency. Restructuring of the NHY ORO, as appropriate,. will be 1 + ' directed by the NHY Offsite Response Director. 3 es f W .' Plan Re erence 1 y M.3.- Section 3.9.2.. g Evaluation - M.3. Adequate. 1 I ' Evaluation Criteria M.4. The offsite' plan shall establish a. method for periodically. estimating total , population exposure. ' Statement. M.4. The offsite plan assigns the responsibility and describes the general basis for estimating total population doses, i.e., field. monitoring results,

dispersion calculations, population data, and exposure times. ' Section 3.9 of the Plan defines total population exposure estimates as an' integrated dose X

exposure commitment' - from : both the plume and ingestion exposure pathways for the population at risk. Total population exposure estimates will be calculated at the conclusion'of a radiological emergency. Plan Reference M.4. - Section 3.9.4 and IP 2.2. Evaluation M.4. Adequate. U. i_m._ _,[_,,

86-May 1998 [ N. Exercises and Drills (Planning Standard N): Periodic exercises are (will be) conducted to evaluate major portions of emergency response capabilities, periodic drills are (will be) conducted to develop and maintain L key skills, and deficiencies identified as a result of exercises or drills are (will be) corrected. . Evaluation Criteria 'N.1.a. An exercise is an event that tests' the integrated capability land a majer portion of the basic elements existing within emergency preparedness plans i and organizations.. The emergency preparedness exercise shall simulate an emergency that results in offsite radiological releases which will require. response by offsite, response organizations. Exercises shall be conducted as set forth in NRC and FEMA rules. . Statement ' N.I.a. .The Director, Emergency Preparedness / Response and Implementation (or designee) is responsible for ensuring that exercises -(and drills) are conducted according to NRC and FEMA guidelines. Plan Reference .N.I.a. Section 6.5 and Appendix K. i l Evaluation N.I.a. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria N.1.b. An exercise shall include mobilization of offsite response organization resources adequate to verify the capability to respond to an accident scenario requiring response. This includes the demonstration of offsite response organization capabilities to interface with non-participating State and local government, but does not include the use of standins for the anticipated State and local response. The offsite response organization shall provide for a critique of the biennial exercise by Federal and offsite response organization observers / evaluators. The scenario shall be varied from exercise to exercise such that all major elements of the plans and 3 preparedness organizations are tested within a six-year period. Each organization shall make provisions to start an exercise between 6:00 p.m.

+ t - hj- '87 May 1988 hi 'and 4:00 a.m.' Exercises shall be conducted during different seasons of the 4 - year. At least one exercise shall be unannounced. Statement N.1.b. The PI'an commits NHY to exercise the full Plan' capability at'least once annually; with a full-scale Federally-observed exercise conducted once every two years. NHY is also committed to vary' the scenario used for the exercise and'the time of day and weather (season) conditions under which the exercise is conducted. This includes holding an exercise between 1800 - to 2400 hours 'and between 2400 and 0600 hours at least once every six years.. NHY has stated that some exercises "will" be unannounced. - The Director Emergency Preparedness / Response and Implementation (or designee) is responsible for ensuring that the exercises (and drills) are conducted at the required intervals. The plan commits NHY ORO to have Federal agencies observe, evaluate, and critique FEMA-graded exercises; while the NHY Drill and Exercise Group will assemble a team of controllers to conduct 'and evaluate all exercises and drills. The plan commits NHY ORO to exercise mobilization of offsite response organization resources adequate to verify the capability of the NHY ORO (and offsite support organizations) to respond to an accident scenario requiring response.. This includes opportunities for State and local organizations to participate. If these organizations do not participate in the exercises _ (or drills), state and local participation will be simulated through the use of a scenario drill message. Plan Reference N.1.b.. Section 6.5 and Appendix K. Evaluation N.1.b. Adequate. l l Evaluation Criteria N.2. A drill is a supervised instruction period aimed at testing, developing and maintaining skills in a particular operation. A drillis often a component of an exercise. A drill shall be supervised and evaluated by a qualified drill instructor. The offsite response organization shall conduct drills, in addition to the biennial exercise at the frequencies indicated below:

83-May 1988 4 x N.2.a. . Communication D_ rills x t' Communications between the licensee and the offsite response organization within' the plume exposure pathway Emergency Planning Zone shall be tested monthly. Communications with Federal emergency re gonse ( organizations and offsite response organizations within ' the ing. :fon pathway shall be tested quarterly. Communications between the nuclear facility,.. offsite response organization's operations centers, and field assessment teams shall be tested annually. Communication d-ills shall also include ' the ' aspect of understanding the content of messages. If practicable, attempts should be made to include non-participating organizations in the monthly ecmmunication drills. Statement i N.2.a. The Plan commits NHY ORO to conduct drills. These drills are to include communication drills which will test: (1) communications (to the extent possible based o'n participation) with Commonwealth and local governments on a monthly basis; (2) communications with Federal emergency response organizations and the states within the ingestion plume pathway on a quarterly basis (to-the extent possible basec on the participation of the Commonwealth cf Massachusetts); and (3) communications among Seabrock Station, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the NHY ORO EOC, and

field monitoring teams on an annual basis.

The communication drills will include operation of communication equipment and relaying information prepared in advance to simulate actual emergency communication conditions and to ensure that the content of the message is understood. U Plan Reference r N.2.a. ' Section 6.5.1 and Appendix K. Evaluation N.2.a. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria N.2.c. Medical Emergency Drills A medical emergency drill involving a simulated contaminated individual which contains provisions for participation by the local support services

~^ c b 89 May 1988-s agencies (i.e., ambulance and offsite medical treatment facility) shall be l conducted annually. The offsite portions of the medical drill may be . performed as part of the required biennial exercise. n I' Statement N.2.c. The Plan commits NHY ORO to conduct an annual medical emergency drill that will involve the participation of ambulance services, offsite medical treatment facilities, and other support services as necessary. The Letters of Agreement between ' NHY and the local support services agencies stipulate that these agency will be participating in such drills. The offsite portion of the medical' drill may be performed as part of the required annual on-site drill. J' Plan Reference N.2.c. Section 6.5.1; Appendix C; and Appendix K. Evaluation N.2.c. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria N.2.d. Radiological Monitoring Drills Plant environs and radiological monitoring drills (onsite and offsite) shall be conducted annually. These drills shall include collection and analysis of all sample med!a (e.g., water, vegetation, soll and air), and provisions for communications and record keeping. Where appropriate, local organizations shall ph.rticipate. Statement N.2.d. The Plan commits NHY ORO to conduct semiannual radiological monitoring drills. These drills willinclude collection and analysis of sample media, and provisions for communications and record keeping. The drills are to include Seabrook Station personnel, radiological monitoring teams, and radiological j ) assessment personnel. l 1 l l l

4 l[; C .90 ' May 1988-t c.. a" .s

Plan Reference N.2.d.

Section 6.5.1 and Appendix K. 4 Evaluation o N.2.4. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria - N.2.e. Health Physics Drills Physics d ills shall be conducted semiannually which involve Health J response to, and analysis of, simulated elevated airborne and liquid samples and direct radiation measurements in the environment. Statement . N.2.e. The Plan commits NHY ORO to conduct semiannual Health Physics Drills. These drills are to. Include analysis of simulated airborne and !! quid releases, and direct radiation measurements in the environment. Plan Reference N.2.'e.. . Section 6.5.1 and Appendix K. Evaluation N.2.e. Adequate. 1 1 Evaluation Criteria N.3. The offsite response organization shall describe how exercises and drills are to be carried out to allow free play for decisionmaking and to meet the following objectives. Pending the development of exercise scenarios and exercise evaluation guidance by NRC and FEMA the scenarios for use in exercises and drills shall include but not be limited to the following: N.3.a. The basic objective (s) of each drill and exercise and appropriate evaluation criteria; 1

m .7 I ..t. b 91- 'May 1988 Statement 3 i N.3.a. The Plan commits NHY ORO to establish the objectives. Objectives will be explained in terms of emergency response-functions to be exercised. Evaluation criteria will be developed. Plan Reference q N. 3.a. Section 6.5.3. Evaluation N.3.a. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria N.3.b. The date(s), time period, place (s) and participating organizations; Statement - N.3.b. The Plan commits NHY ORO to schedule the date(s), time period, place (s), and participating organizations for each exercise and drill. Plan Reference N.3.b. Section 6.5.3. Evaluation N.3;b. Adequate. i' Evaluation Criteria N.3.c. The simulated events; k Statement N.3.c. The Plan commits NHY ORO to develop a scenario with simulated events for exercises and drills that will include escalation through the emergency j l 1 1

I 92 May 1988 1 classification levels. The Director, Emergency Preparedness / Response and Implementation will ensure that sufficient offsite events are added to meet the objectives of the exercise. Plan Reference N.3.c. Section 6.5.3. Evaluation N.3.c. Adequate. ( Evaluation Criteria N.3.d. A time schedule of real and simulated initiating events; Statement N 3.d. The Plan commits NHY ORO to a schedule of real and simulated events. The timeline of offsite events will be developed and integrated with ~' initiating events prepared for Seabrook Station. Plan Reference N.3.d. Section 6.5.3. Evaluation N.3.d. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria N.3.e. A narrative summary describing the conduct of the exercises or drills to include such things as simulated casualties, offsite fire department assistance, rescue of personnel, use of protective clothing, deployment of radiological monitoring teams, and public information activities; and Statement N.3.e. The Plan commits NHY ORO to develop a ns.rrative summary that describes the conduct of the exercise. The summary will include real and i

e, '93 May 1998 1 i it i \\ simulated events, anticipated response,.and the extent to which the [.._ ' activities will be exercised or simulated. Plan Reference N.3.e. Section 6.5.3. Evaluation N.3.e. Adequate. Evaluathn Criteria N.3.f. A description of the arrangements for and advance materials to be provided to official observers. Statement N.3.f. The Plan commits the NHY ORO to work with FEMA to schedule 'the placement of evaluators during drills and exercises. The Drill and Exercise Group will assemble a team of controllers to conduct and evaluate all drills and exercises. Evaluators and controllers will be provided with copies of the scenarios and any required plans and procedures prior to the exercise or drill. Evaluators and controllers will be briefed as to the schedule of events and evaluation criteria for each location, and will be provided with evaluation sheets and guidelines applicable to their locations. Plan Reference N.3.f. Section 6.5.4. Evaluation N.3.f. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria N.4. Official observers from Federal government and the offsite response organization shall observe, evaluate, and critique the required exercises. A critique shall be scheduled at the conclusion of the exercise to evaluate the ability of organizations to respond as called for in the offsite plan. The

94 May 1938 g critique shall be conducted as soon as practicable after the exere!se, and a formal evaluation shall result from the critique. Statement N.4. The Plan commits NHY ORO to have evaluators from Federal agencies observe, evaluate, and critique FEMA-graded exercises. The Drill and Exercise Group of NHY will assemble a team of controllers to conduct and evaluate all drills and exercises. The

Director, Emergency Preparedness / Response and Implementation will ensure that a critique of the NHY ORO personnel is conducted at the conclusion of each exercise.

The Director, Emergency Preparedness / Response and Implementation will ensure that a formal Post-Exercise Critique Report is prepared and distributed. Plan Reference N.4. Section 6.5.4; Section 6.5.5; Section 6.5.6; and Appendix K. Evaluation N.4. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria N.S. The offsite response organization shall establish means for evaluating observer and participant comments on areas needing improvement, including emergency plan procedural changes, and for assigning responsibi!!ty for implementing corrective actions. The offsite response organization shall establish management control used to ensure that corrective actions are implemented. Statement N.5. The Plan commits the Director, Emergency Preparedness / Response and Implementation to review all controller / evaluator comments on exercises and drills and to prepare a response stating his concurrence or disagreement with any listed issue. The Director will then prepare a schedule that tracks assigned responsibilities for providing corrective actions for valid issues. Corrective actions may include revisions of the Plan or implementation procedures, upgrades in equipment or facilities, and additional training and drills.

y.

y ',, n; s b-95 May_1988 iufi' o s.'", Plan Reference - - N.5. Section 6.5.6. Evaluation. N.S.-

Adequate.

Evaluation Criteria ' N. 6. - The. offsite response organization shall attempt. to involve. the non- ' participating State and local government in the exercises and drills, but ~ their participatiords not required. Statement N.6. The Plan states' that Emergency Response Training will be offered to State -.and local emergency officiais and' workers. Exercises and drills are considered part of the emergency response training offered by t% NHY ORO. Plan Reference N.6. Section 6.1. Evaluation 'N.6. Adequate. I 4 e l r

L 96 May.1988

O.

Radiological Emergency Response Training (Planning Standard O): Radiological emergency response training is provided to those who may be called on. - to assist in an emergency. Evaluation Criteria 0.1. The offsite response organization shall assure' the training of appropriate individuals. The offsite response organization shall participate in and receive training. Where mutual aid.~ agreements exist between ~ local agencies such as fire, police and ambulance / rescue, the training shall also be offered to the other departments who are members of the mutual aid district.1 s Statement . O.1. The NHY ORO has established a program to train appropriate individuals assigned to the position descriptions within the organization. Training is to ' be received by all members of the NHY ORO, unless individuals are specifically quallfled for exemption, and is offered to other local agencies and departments. The training is conducted by the Training Group within the NHY ORO. Plan Reference 0.1. Section 6.1; Table 6.3-1; and Appendix K. Evaluation 0.1. Adequate. - ITraining for hospital personnel, ambulance / rescue, police and fire department shall include the procedures for notification, basic radiation protection, and their expected roles. For those local services support organizations who will enter the site, training shall also include site access procedures and the identity (by position and title) of the individual in the onsite emergency organization who will control the organization support activities. Offsite emergency response support personnel should be provided with appropriate identification cards where required.

97 .May 1988 Evaluation Criteria O.4. The offsite response organization shall establish a training program for instructing and qualifying personnel who will implement r&diological emergency response plans.- The specialized initial training and periodic retraining programs (including the scope, nature and frequency) shall be provided in the following c'ategories: 1 0.4.a. Directors or coordinators of the response organizations; Statement 0.4.a. The NHY ORO has established a training program for instructing and qualifying personne?who will implement radiological emergency response plans. Specific training modules, out of a total of 21 modules, are assigned for each of the position descriptions within the organization. The NHY Offsite Response Director, the Assistant Offsite Response Directors, and the Emergency Preparedness Advisor receive all of the basic training modules on an annuts1 basis. Plan Reference 0.4.a. Section 6.3; Table 6.3-1; and Appendix K. Evaluation l O.4.a. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria O.4.b. Personnel responsible for accident assessment; Statement O.4.b. The NHY ORO has established a training program for instructing and qualifying personnel who will implemer.t radiological emergency response plans. Specific training modules, out af a total of 21 modules, are assigned 21f the offsite response organization lacks the capability and resources to accomplish this training, they may look to the licensee and the Federal government (FEMA) for assistance in this training.

l 98 May 1988 for eact if the position descriptions within the organization (Table 6.3-1). Personnel responsible for accident assessment include the Technical

Advisor, the Radiological Health

Advisor, Accident Assessment Coordinator, Dose Assessment Technician, and Exposure Control Coordinator.

The Radiological Health ' Advisor receives the basic core of accident assessrent modules; e.g., Dose / Accident Assessment, Radiation Survey & Analysis, Monitoring & Decontamination Operation, and Dosimetry Recordkeeping. The Technical Advisor receives the Dose / Accident Assessment module. The Accident Assessment Coordinator receives the Dose / Accident Assessment, Radiation Surveys & Analysis, and Dosimetry Recordkeeping modules. The Dose Assessment Technician receives the Dose / Accident Assessment and Radiation Surveys & Analysis modules. All these groups receive.the basic overview on emergency preparedness, EOC s operation and training on their procedures. Plan Reference 0.4.b. Section 6.3; Table 6.3-1; and Appendix K. Evaluation O.4.b. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria O.4.c. Radiological monitoring teams and radiological analysis personnel; Statement O.4.c. The NHY ORO has established a training program for instructing and qualifying personnel who will implement radiological emergency response plans. Specific training modules, out of a total of 21 modules, are assigned for each of the position descriptions within the organization (Table 6.3-1). The Field Team Dispatcher, the Field Monitoring Teams, and Sample Collection teams receive the Radiation Surveys & Analysis module. The Reception Center and Emergency Worker Facility Teams receive the Monitoring & Decontamination Operation module. The Emergency Worker Facility Team receives the Staging Area operations module. Both these groups receive the basic overview on emergency preparedness and training on their procedures. L__

4, i. 99 May.1988 ~ s j Plan Reference. O.4.c. - Section 6.3; Table 6.3-1; and Appendix K. k Evaluation - i O.4.c. ' Adequate. Evaluation Criteria O.4.d. Police, security and fire fighting personnel; e Statement O.4.d. The NHY ORO has established a training program for instructing and qualifying personnel who will implement radiological emergency response plans. Specific training modules, out of a total of 21 modules, are assigned for each of the position descriptions within the organization (Table 6.3-1). The Evacuation Support Coordinator receives the EOC Operations. Traffic and Access Control, and Transportation modules. The Special Population Coordinator, the School Coordinator, and Bus Company Liaison receive the EOC Operations module. The Staging Area Leader, Evacuation Support Dispatcher, and Traffic Guides receive the Traffic and Access Control module. The Bus Company Liaison, the Staging Area Leader, the Evaluation Support Dispatcher, the Special Vehicle Dispatcher, the Bus Dispatcher, the Transfer Point Dispatcher, the Route Guides, the road crews, the ambulance, bus and van drivers receive the Transportation module. All these groups receive the basic overview on emergency preparedness and training on their procedures. Plan Reference - O.4.d. Section 6.3; Table 6.3-1; and Appendix K. 1 Evaluation j O.4.d. Adequate. l i l I 1 u =-

i 100 May 1988 Evaluation Criteria O.4.f. First aid and rescue personnel; Statement 0.4.f. The NHY. ORO ' has established a training program for instruct'ng and qualifying personnel who will implement radiological emergency response plans. Specific training < modules, out of a total of 21 modules, are assigned for each of the positlen descriptions within the organization (Table 6.3-1). The Ambulance Drivers receive the Medical Emergency module, the basic overview on emergency preparedness, and training on their procedures. Plan Reference 0.4.f. Section 6.3; Table 6.3-1; and Appendix K. Evaluation O.4.f. - Adequate. Evaluation Criteria L O.4.g. Local support services personnel including Civil Defense / Emergency Service personnel; l Statement O.4.g. The local organizations are not participating in the planning effort. See statement under O.E. Plan Reference 0.4.g. None. Evaluation O.4.g. Adequate. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ ___ _ ___________________________.___________________j

l ~ 101 May 1988 l Evaluation Criteria O.4.h. - Medical support personnel; Statement' O.4.h. -No medical support personnel are included in the NHY ORO, according to u . the position descriptions given in the plan (Section 2.1.1). Ambulance drivers are considered in this review under criterion O.4.f., first aid and rescue personnel. Plan Reference. O.4.h. Section 6.3. Evaluation O.4.h. Adequate /Not Applicable. Evaluation Criteria O.4.J. Personnel responsible for transmission of emergency information and instructions; and Statement O.4.J. The NHY ORO has established a training program for instructing and qualifying personnel who will implement radiological emergency response plans. Specific training modules, out of a total of 21 modules, are assigned for each of the position descriptions within the organization (Table 6.3-1). The Public Information Advisor, Communications Coordinator, Public Information Coordinator, Public Notification Coordinator, and Radio Operator receive the Public Notification System Activation module. The Public Information Advisor, Public Information Coordinator, Public Notification Coordinator, Public Information Staff, Rumor Control Staff, and Media Center Support Staff receive the Public Information module. All these groups receive the basic overview on emergency preparedness and training on their procedures. 1 er2__-_---__--_--_-___.___..___.--_-_.

E 'i 102 DMay 1938

Plan Reference.

4 m O.4.J. Section 6.3; Table 6.3-1; and Appendix K. Evaluation ' O.4.J. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria O.4.k. Personnel responsible for interfacing with State and local responders. 7 s i Statement O.4.k. The NHY ORO has established a training program for instructing and qualifying personnel who will implement radiological emergency response plans.' Specific training modules, out of a total of 21 modules, are assigned for each of the position descriptions within the organization (Table 6.3-1). The Local EOC Liaisons receive the Staging Area Operations module. The State liaisons recere; the EOC operations, rssimetry Recordkeeping and Emergency Management modules. In addition, the State Liaison assigned to the Massachusetts Department of Public Health receives the Dose / Accident Assessment module. All these groups receive the basic overview on emergency preparedness, Public Notification System Activation, Public Information, Traffic and Access Control, Transportation, l and Dosimetry Recordkeeping modules, as well as training on their procedures. Plan Reference 0.4.k. Section 6.3; Table 6.3-1; and Appendix K. Evaluation i O.4.k. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria j l O.5. The offsite response organization shall provide for the initial and annual retraining of personnel with emergency response responsibilities.

103 May 1908 Statement 0.5. The training program described in-the plan provides for the initial and lH , annual.. retraining (Appendix ' E, p. K-8) of personnel with emergency response responsibilities. Plan Reference 0.5. Section 6.1 and Appendix K. Evaluation 0.5. Adequate. .i. Evaluation Criteria O.6. The offsite response organization shall offer tra!aing to non-participating State and local governments and other organizations. Statement 0.6. The NHY ORO makes a commitment to offer training to non-participating State and local governments and other organizations. A suggested training matrix for such organizations is given in the plan, Identifying specific modules appropriate to each agency or position -l l (Table 6.6-1). - Plan Reference 0.6. Section 6.6 and Table 6.6-1. Evaluation O.6. Adequate. l

u-- ws c i. 104 ..M a y, ' 19 8 8 N P.: Responslb lity for the Planning Effort: Development, Periodic Review and distribution of Emergency Plans (Planning Standard P): Responsibilities for plan development and review and for distribution of emergency plans are establishe'd, and planners are properly trained. Evaluation Criteria P.1. The offsite response. organization' shall provide for the training Lof c'- individuals responsible for the offsite planning effort. Statement P.1. The NHY ORO will' provide' training to the NHY Emergency Planning Staff to assure that personnel remain qualified and aware of current issues in emergency preparedness. ~ lan Reference P P.1. Section 7.1.4. Evaluation P.1. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria 'P.2. The offsite response organization shall identify by title the individual with the overall authority and responsibility for radiological emergency response planning. Statement P.2. The NHY Director of Emergency Preparedness has overall responsibility for 1 Seabrook Emergency Preparedness, including offsite emergency planning. Plan Reference l P.2. Se:: tion 7.1.1.

105 May 1988 Evaluation P.2. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria l P.3. The offsite response organization shall designate an Emergency Planning Coordinator with responsibility for the development and updating of emergency plans and coordination of these offsite plans with other response organizations. Statement P.3. The NHY Massachudtts Emergency Planning Coordinator has responsibility for plan maintenance and coordination of the NHY ORO Plan with other response organizations. Plan Reference P.3. Section 7.1.2. Evaluation P.3. Adequate. I EvaJuation Criteria P.4. The offsite response organization shall update its plan and agreements as needed, review and certify it to be current on an annual basis. The update shall take into account changes identified by drills and exercises. Statement P.4. The NHY ORO has made provisions for annual update of its plan and J agreements. An annual letter of certification will be sent to FEMA by January 31 of every year. Plan Reference P.4. Section 7.2 and Section 7.6. ____-_.---.J

l, ' @- E 106' M:y 1980 Evaluation P.4. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria L l P.S.. The offsite ' emergency response plans and approved changes to the plans shall be forwarded to' all participating organizations and appropriate i. Individuals with responsibility for implementation of the plans. Revised pages shall be dated and marked to show where changes have been made. Statement P.S. The NHY ORO hasmade provisions for promulgating revisions. The NHY ORO has made' provisions for forwarding revisions to plan holders of record. Plan Reference - P.S. Section 7.2.1. Evaluation P.S. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria P.6. l The offsite plan shall contain a detailed listing of supporting plans and their source. Statement P.6. The NHY ORO plan contains a list of supporting plans. Plan Reference l P.6. Appendix F. e l H.

107' May '1980-

-j Evaluation" P.6. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria,

P.7.

The offsite plan shall contain as an appendix listing, by title, procedures ! required to implement the offsite plan.- The listing shall include the section(s) of the offsite plan to be implemented by each procedure. Statement P.7. The NHY ORO plan contains an appendix list, by title, of procedures required to implemest the plan. a - Plan Reference i P.7. Appendix E. i j Evaluation ~ P.7. Adequate. Evaluation Criteria-P.8. The offsite plan shall contain a specific table of contents. Plans submitted i for revit :/ should be cros1-referenced to these criteria. Statement P.8. The NHY ORO plan contains a spee!fic table of contents. The plan sections are cross-referenced to these criteria. i Plan Reference P.8. Appendix D. Evalustion P.8. Adequate. i J

/ -108 May '988 p.;.. . Evaluation ~ Criteria P.10. The offsite response organization shall provide for updating telephone numbers in emergency procedures at least quarterly. Statement l P.10. The NHY ORO has rnade provisions for updating the Communication I Directory quarterly. Plan Reference P.10. Section 7.4.3 and IP 4.4. Evaluation i i ' P.10. Adequate. j i Evaluation Criteria The offsite response organization shall provide copies of the offsite plan P.11. and its revisions to non-participating State and local government entitles where interfaces are identified in Planning Standard A. Statement P.11. The NHY ORO has made provisions to provide copies of the complete Plan to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the six plume exposure EPZ communities. Plan Reference t l P.11. Section 7.2.1. Evaluation P.11. Adequate. -_-_.:___a--__.,._______

19 g,_ t' ~ May '1938 - 109 3 Seabrook' Plan and Preparedness for' Massachusetts Communities Review ~ ~' Rating Summary Element Rating Element-Rating Element. Racing A.1.a' A H.3- 'A N.l.a A W A.l.b A-H.4 A 'N.1.b 'A A.l.c' A. H. 7-A N.2.a A A.1.d A H.10 A-N.2.c A A.l.e A H.ll A N.2.d A A.2.a A H.12 A N.2.e~ A A.2.b' A I.7 A' N.3.a A

A.3 -_pgJ/;- I I.8 A-N.3.b A

.A.4~ A-I.9~ A N.3.c A'

g. :

U C.l.a A i' I.10 A N.3.d A C l.b A-I.ll A N.3.e A C.1.c A J.2 A/NA N.3.f A I l C.2.a A - J. 9 Bn n - 57 I N.4 A C.2.b A J.10.a ;- A - C.2.c A J.10.b A N.5 A C.3 A -rJ.10.crp.ja I N.6 A C.4 .A J.10.d A 0.1 A C.5-A -+J.10.ee:../n I-0.4.a A D.3 A J.10.f A 0.4.b A D.4 .A J.10.g A-0.4.c A E.l' A - J.10. hip me I. 'O.4.d A b' E.2' A J.10.i 'A~ O.4.e A l E.3 A +J.10.jgg,jn I 0.4.f A E.4 A' J.10.k A O.4.g A a E.5 ' 0p7M9 I -+J.10.1 n t /N I 0.4.h A/NA i ..+ E.6 p92.pe I J.10.m A 0.4.j A E.7 A- + J.11 r y 1*- I 0.4.k A E.8 A J.12 A 0.5 A F.1.a A_ -t K.3.a pg M/7s I 0.6 A F.1.b A K.3.b A P.1 A F.1.c A K.4 A P.2 A F.1.d A K.5.a A P.3 A .+ F.1.e pqga. I K.5.b A P.4 A F.2 A L.1 A P.5 A F.3 A L.3 A P.6 A -p G.1 M3 2 5 -e I L.4 A P.7 A + G. 2 e,-,/,, I M.1 A P.8 A G.3 A H.3 A P.10 A G.4.a A H.4 A P.ll A G.4.b A G.4.c A i G.5 A f 4 _~ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _________.___.__.____.___.__________________.___5

s, ^ s 'I C0. 4 g pn u x 's V-5- ' h e, ic 4-s es,; , r.s4 F ? 1 -\\.., f 'J A m i: : li ' ~ A?PENDIX As - - FEMA-REP-11 REVIEW AND EVALUATION OF F SEABROOK PUBLIC EDUCATION MATERIALS e 4 .o-5- t c /* 1 f ..~ }. k. )[ ' J ___.__._____m_.___________-...__.____m_. ____________.___m.___

APPENDIX.A A-A t.. 1 p. The Seabrook Plan for Massachusetts Communities contained the 1988-89 Emergency Plan Information Calendar and a variety of supporting materials. The following evaluation rating scheme identifies the rating system used to evaluate the Emergency Plan Information Calendar: Yes, fully meets identified criteria. Marginally acceotable; could be improved. l Inadecuate. Insufficient information to evaluate; item should be checked for consistency with FEMA criteria or for being acceptably addressed through another medium. i This report is divided into three categories: CATEGORY 1: These items are critical to the effectiveness of a public Information document. All items identified as not fully meeting the identified criteria (i.e., those items marked marginally acceptable, inadequate, or insufficient information) must be improved prior to pu'alication and distribution in 1988. n CATEGORY 2: These items are important to the effectiveness of a public information document. Items in this categcry identified as marginally acceptable, inadequate, or insufficient information, should be reviewed and revision considered prior to the 1988 distribution, CATEGORY 3: These items are enhancements to the overall quality of a public catergency information document. Items in the categories identified as marginally acceptable, inadequate, or insufficient information, should be reviewed and revision considered prior to distribution in 1988. Our evaluation of the Emergency Plan Information Calendar Document, in the order of FEMA-REP-11's Summary Guidance Checklist, is as follows: I l

APPENMX A A A-2 CATEGORY 1 CONTENT ' Evaluation Criteria Document has a clear emergency focus. It should tell the reader what to expect, in what sequence. It should tell what actions, in order of priority, should be taken if notification is given. Statement None. Evaluation Yes. Evaluation Criteria The content is consistent with the Emergency Plan ar.d EBS messages. l Statement NUREG-0654/ FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1, specifies the criteria for development of Emergency Action Levels (EALs) ot which the four classes of emergency are declared. It is the responsibility of the reactor licensee (10 CFR 50, Appendix E. Part IV) to declare a specific class of emergency based on the EALs and to take the appropriate actions. Those actions include making prompt Protective . Action Recommenc'ations (PARS). The licensee's declared emergency classification cannot be changed by offsite c(ficials. It is the responsibility of offsite officials to make those Protective Actions (pas) necessary to protect the public. These actions should be consistent with the licensee's PARS. The Seabrook Plan for Massachusetts Communities, hereafter called the Plan, describes a PA Concept of Operation. This PA Concept of Operation specifies the early closure of beaches and the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge (only within the summer season), and the recommendation of pas on an ERP A basis (note, there are six communities in the Massachusetts portion of the l 1 plume Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ]). It also describes the fact that various Federal agencies will be responsible for effecting pas for the river and ocean waters within the plume EPZ (USCG), and for the portions of Plum Island under the control of the Department of the Interior. The Calendar does not specify that the public (permanent and transient) would have to evacuate the beaches at Alert, Site Area Emergency, or General Emergency (section on Background Information). The current Calendar does I

I j APPENDIX A A-3 l not state that the public may be asked to shelter at the SAE, nor does. it convey the impression that the shelter PA will cause most commerce in the l affected areas to cease operations (section on Background Information). The { Calendar does not advocate precautionary pas fer Special Populations (section l on Evacuation Plans for Special Groups), as recomment'ed by FEMA guidance. j Evalustion Inadequate. Evaluation Criteria There is a clear statement of purpose. Statement The statement of purpose is not clearly stated (page 1). The reader must infer the purpose of the document from the series of statements regarding the Emergency Plan. Evaluation Marginally acceptable. Evaluation Criteria If the Emergency Plan calls for an emergency phone number, it is given along with instructions on the procedures to be followed relative to its use. Be sure to distinguish " Hotline" numbers for use during emergencies as separate from information numbers during non-emergency times. Statement The current document does contain and reference spaces for " Emergency" and " Hotline" phone numbers. The document does contain phone numbers to call for additional information. Evaluation Yes. Evaluation Criteria There is a contact given for additional information. !L_ __ _ _ _ _ _.

W ~

APPENDIX.A o

A-4 i ~ . Statemerit - None. . Evaluation 4 Yes. - s- ./' u. Evaluation Criteria h Information is given regarding notification procedures. Statement The -notification proc sdures are clearly: explained for permanent residents. The notification procedures are not clearly explained for beaters on the Merrimac River and those portions of the Atlantic Ocean within the plume EPZ.- There is no description on how the transients on the beaches and visitors to those portions of the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge will be notified. Evaluation Inadequate. -t . Evaluation Criteria [ Identification of EBS stations is given, with stations / channels. Statement The radio stations, WHAV 1490 AM and WLYT 92.5 FM, are identified on page 2 of the document. Evaluation Yes. Evaluation Criteria ) There is a highly visible statement on the cover about keeping the document l for use in the event of an emergency. l Statement A Retention statement appears on the front and back addressed side of the self-mailer. In the next revision, it might be worthwhile to include the Instruction to " Read" as well as to "Save" the document. l-

L APPENDIX 'A A,., ' Evaluation

Yes, p,

l l Evaluation Criteria 1 l Educational Information. The very basic information on radiation must be ( included in the emergency brochure to convey a sense of health risk. L Statement L This information is presented in a question and answer format (pages 10 and 11). The questions are well chosen, simple, and sequenced to provide useful information. The information is largely in text form, and the language can be complex. Tables ant diagrams are used effectively to summarize certain information. The National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements has revised its estimates of ionizing radiation exposure (NCRP Report #91). The amounts of radiation quoted in this section are not the current estimates. 1 Evaluation l-Marginally acceptable. THE EMERGENCY INSTRUCTIONS SECTION INCLUDES A DISCUSSION OF: l Evaluation Criteria Sheltering. Statement None. 1 Evaluation g l Yes. Evaluation Criteria Evacuation routes, both written explanations in the text and illustrated directions on an evacuation map of the EPZ. U _- ____ _= _

APPENDIX A-A-6 1 Statement - i

1) The map scale is' inadequate for a person to determine his/her evacuation-route.

Since this document is intended for residents. In Massachusetts communities, the applicable portions of the plume EPZ sr.ould be displayed !n an adequate format (scale). The scale should be adequate for a person.to read and determine their evacuation ' route..The map should' include labeling of arrows for evacuation routes. 2) The evacuation route for Salisbury (page 6)is Inconsistent with the route given in the Plan (Appendix J, p. S-19), and with the Salisbury TCPs, which divert such traffic west to.P.oute 110. Evaluation inadequate. ' Evaluation Criteria Transportation provisions. Statement A Emergency tus rot?te instructions and maps for. each major bus route by community L:a contained in the document (pages 7-10). The information is organized in such a.way that those needing transportation assistance.could easily locate emergency buses. Evaluation Yes. Evaluation Criteria School provisions; including guidelines and/or instructions for parents. Statement The current Plan states that transportation assistance will be provided to school authorities, if required. The text in the document does not reflect the fact as to who may effect pas for school children (i.e., the appropriate School District or the NHY ORO). Evaluation i Marginally acceptable. s L______---_----------.--___------_______________________.-------_---_----

-g j APPENDIX A A-7 y .lk ? l ^ ~ Evaluation Criteria' ' Instructions on the care and feeding of livestock, if appropriate, in the area. Statement The document outlines simple steps 'for the protection of pets and livestock-and references sources of additional information for f armers about the-protection of livestock and crops (page 3). Evaluation-Yes. Evaluation Celteria . Reception. Centers, Relocation and/or Congregate Care Centers. Statement - The document identifies Reception Centers (pages 3, 4, 5, and 6). Tha document does not adequately describe the distinction between Reception Centers, host facilities, and shelters. The Plan identifies host facilities for schools, host facilities for Special Groups, and Congregate Care Centers for the general public who may need temporary shelter. Evaluation Marginally acceptable. Evaluation Criteria Provisions for the handicapped. ~ Statement None. Evaluation Yes.

4 A?PENDIX A A-8.. .ORG A NIZATION ' l Evaluation Criteria The emergency instructions occupy a highly visible place in the front of the document. - Statement None. . Evaluation Yes. Evaluation Criteria The information is logically sequenced. Statement The order.of presentation is appropriate if the raader progresses through the information in the intended sequence. There is a potential sequencing problem caused by the format. Many readers would progress from Page 1 to the page . directly below entitled "About Safety at Seabrook Station" instead of turning to Page 2 as intended. Also, readers not recognizing that a double-page format is used might tend, for example, to follow the section "How you would be told about an Emergency" with the reading of "The 10-Mile Emergency Planning Zone" at the top of the next column instead of continuing down the left-hand column to the page below. This could prove especially frustrating to readers using the document at the time of an emergency. Note, if at all possible, readers should not have to make sequencing decisions. Evaluation Marginally acceptable. Evaluation Criteria information is clearly organized and relevant to the purpose of providing emergency guidance. Statement Overall the document is well-organized for the purpose of providing vital emergency information.

APPENDfX A fc A-9

v.,

' Evaluation ~ Yes. Evaluation Criteria Public education passages, if included, are not distracting. Statement The bulk.of educational information appropriately follows the emergency action sections. However, the separate and prominently displayed page "About' Safety at Seabrook" which hangs below the informational material'in the Calendar distracts _ fegm the Emergency Purpose. As mentioned above o ~' (Format), the awkward positioning of this page coupled with the double page format used in the document makes it likely that readers will unknowingly proceed to this page in the midst of reading vital emergency instructions and Information. Evaluation Margibally acceptable. COMPREHENSION FACTORS Evaluat'on Criteria The document layout is such that the text is easy to follow from paragraph to paragraph and from page to page. Page and section breaks a a consistent with the logic and organization of the material. Statement The double panel format of the opened pages causes the columns to read vertically down two pages instead of across horizontally. This format poses potential confusion for a reader in trying to determine where text begins;i.e., at the bottom of a double page and continue at the top of the next column. The potential for confusion could cause some readers to lose their places or read on to the wrong section. Evaluation Marginally acceptable. g .__c_

g_ ip h APPE!QIX A 'A-10 l f Evaluation Criteria -

6. 3 The information is pitsented in such a way that there is a logical sequence of.

topics.; The " flow" of information is smooth and not disjointed. Statemeni-. s O See comments under Format, Public Education Material, and Layout. .fa-Evaluation-1 L ~ Marginally acceptable. J Evaluation Criteria Nithin'a given topic, actions to.be taken come first, followed by rationale or explanation. Statement Generally, vital Emergency Instructions precede other related information in each section of the document. Note, see comments under school provisions. [ Evaluation a. Yes. Evaluation Criteria 5 Vocabulary is simple, comprised of non-technical terms likely to be found in the vocabularies of the intended population. Statement None. Evaluation .. m Yes. y; Evaluation Criteria Sentences are brief and concise. i 1 l

hfph APPENDIX A 3 11 Statement None. Evaluation Yes. Evaluation Criteria [Th'e cover clearly states that the document contains important emergency instructions. Statement 'n Both front and back covers indicate the emergency nature of the document. e Evaluation Yes. : Evaluation Criteria The choice of colors is appropriate for color-blind individuals. Statement Since the draft document was in black-line proof, it is impessible to judge how colors will be used. Evaluation Insufficient information. Evaluation Criteria The reading is appropriate. This is based on one of the following: Statement A Dale-Chall evaluation of readability indiented that the entire emergency procedures section of the document has a reading level of grade 9 or below, as characterized by the Dale-Chall readability formula. .m___

APPENDIX A Evaluation Yes. c.- CATEGORY 2 L i. CONTENT s Evaluation Criteria n Information is given regarding EALs and enough educational information on radiation is given to provide an understanding of sources and relative effects. or provision is made in a separate document. ~ Statement As mentioned under " Content" in Category 1, the information given regarding EALs.is inconsistent with the emergency plans and procedures of the offsite authorities. The document does contain an excellent discussion of radiation and radioactivity in the educational section. Evaluation inadequate. Evaluation Criteria .Information has been provided for transients and visitors appropriate means. Statement Information has been provided for transients and visitors via the productions of ancillary materials. Evaluation See Attachment A for comments. Evaluation Criteria A method of identifying special needs has been provided in such a way that it cannot be lost during shipment or during the initial reading. W_ -_~x. --m

w q_ APPENDIX'A a .A.D Statement - This rating is based on the assumption that the survey' card and sticker _will. - ultimately be firmly bound into the Calendar. Evaluation . Yes. Evaluation Criteria-Consideration has been given to needs of the special populations. . Statement ' See our comments under " Schools" in ' Category 1 and " Method of Identifying ~ Special Needs"in Category 2. Evaluation - Yes. THE EMERGENCY INSTRUCTIONS SECTION INCLUDES A DISCUSSION OF: Evaluation Criteria l Respiratory protection. Statement Respiratory protection is addressed in the last bulleted item in the section "How to Take Shelter"(page 2). Evaluation l Yes. Evaluation Criteria Radioprotective drugs (if adopted by State or local government agencies for use by the general public).

a---_.a

-a,,_a.

.-,--aa-m.- -...a.

,u-------_---.---u_--- --a-----_-_---

_-____a-_u,_--a-..

!O Y ~ APPENDIX'A

(,

A 'h&. x 'sg 3 Statement There is no mention made of the use of radioprotective drugs for the general public, which is in agreement with the Commo wealth's current policies.- P Evaluation . Yes. - ..z. Evaluation Criteria . Encouragement to alert neighbors, by means other than the telephone, to . ensure they also heard and understood the warning signals. ' Statement None. Evaluation Yes. Evaluation Criteria Emergency supplies checklist to have in the home. Statement No such checklist is provided in the document. Evaluation Inadequate. ) Evaluation Criteria Supplies checklist for use in the event of evacuation. Statement None. Evaluation Yes.

g. = -

t -, c APPENDIX.- A-A-15 . Evaluation Criteria Home preparation for sheltering. Statement None. Evaluation Yes. Evaluation Criteria Home preparation fd evacuation. Statement 'None. Evaluation Yes. ORGANIZATION Evaluation Criteria General educational material, if included, is placed after the emergency procedures information. i l Statement See comments on Format and Lafout with regard to the page "About Safety at Seabrook." Evaluation Yes. d

<3 - APPENDIX A A-16. .3, COMPREHENSION FACTORS Evaluation Criteria The cover design encourrges one to open the publication and to read what it-contains.- Statement ' r- 'None. Evaluation Yes. Evaluation Criteria Tne format is appropriate for the emergency information included in the document, and the size is appropriate. E'.atement The type and size of the document (Calendar) is appropriate. The double page format, which included. a fold-out page, makes the initial reading of .) Information in the proper sequence difficult. The map has an inappropriate scale and does not contain enough information. Evaluation . Marginally acceptable. Evaluation Criteria Photographs, maps, charts, tables, and artwork are used effectively to enhance the text and are not distracting. Statement The drawings and illustrations are effectively done and mesh well with the adjacent subject matter, reinforcing the content. The plume map is clearly labeled, but difficult to use. The bus route maps are clearly labeled and easy to use. Evaluation Marginally acceptable. I a

.q APPENDIX A' - E A-17 Fraastion Criteria . The various elements of graphic design work together harmoniously to achieve the desired effect. ' Statement '.1 - The various elements of graphic design which have been incorporated serve to enhance the utility, comprehensibility, and attractiveness of the document. Evaluation Yes. CATEGORY 3 CONTEliT L Evaluation Criteria The document contains the date of issue and the name of the issubg agency. Statement The Calendar format ensures current dates, and the name of the issuing organization appears on both the front and back cover. Evaluation Yes. Evaluation Criteria Document contains blank space in the emergency procedures section for personal notes. Statement The document includes both a note-taking form to be used in recording family information as well as a general notes page. Evaluation Yes.

r A-18 ) Evaluation Criteria Document contains a section on family preplanning. ' Statement No special section devoted to family preplanning is included in the document. Evaluation Inadequatt COMPREHENSION FACTORS i Evaluation Criteria. Key symbols or graphic images are used to assist the reader in locating and/or understanding the text. Statement Graphic images are used well. Key symbols are not used, nor is there an index cr table of contents. Evaluation Marginally acceptable. Evaluation Criteria For format encourages retention. Statement The use of an attractive Calendar format is typically a good aid to retention. We have some concern that the bulkiness of the informational portion of the document and the manner of folding required for Calendar use may result in recipients designed either to tear out and discard the emergency information portion of the document so that the Calendar hands more flush with the wall, or not use the Calendar. Evaluation Marginally acceptable.

.m m i APPENDIX A- 'A-19. s i. A::., a.: t Evaluation Criteria ..y Color. has been used effectively to enhance and highlight important ' etails ~d relative to the emergency information. Lu. Statement i, Color.use ~cannot be judged at this time.. Evaluation i.. Insufficient information. s I' H G. p.. Ii lL i J t E-__________._m.m.-_ ________._._.___.____m_ ______.m__.__._______._ .__._m.____..__.____.

n. y < ;4 j } ( r Ul~

j. 9 L

lA-20' APPENDIX A [ At tach.T.ent - A w i ATTACHMENT A r - SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS'

== Introduction:== Most-of 1the supplementary materials are intended. for f . distribution to the ; transient (population. Many of the-materials have been'.. produced in French and English versions _.due to Seabrook's proximity to the W.y Canadian border. The French versions 'are identical in format-and design to their English counterparts. Examination of the French translations reveals 1 that.they are accurate, use appropriate vocabulary, and.though written in.the French of France, they are(comprehensible. to Canadian French-speaking readers. Note, one'. error was found in the last French sentence of_ the 'large ' map poster; i.e., the unnecessary repetition of "En Cas." r.7 ' - The following revMw and evaluations are on the set of documents identified in p. the Plan as part of the Public Education Pregram. A FOLD-OUT BROCHURE ENTITLED MASSACHUSETTS EMERGENCY PLAN. INFORMATION This. brochure, printed in both English and French,-is apparently intended.for distribution to' the Massachusetts transient population. The document' is logically sequenced and simply worded (the reading level of most passages is 5th-6 th' grade). The content is.not appropriate for the intended audience. Provisions of this brochure'should enable transients to protect themselves in . the event of a nuclear emergency at Seabrook. The issues are as follows: the fold-out format, which can lead to inappropriate sequences, depending a on how the brochure is folded and opened, and which makes the brochure . awkward to use in a moving vehicle. the section on notification "How You Would be Told About an Emergency" ) . is inappropriate for the intended audience. For example, there is no j description of the Public Announcement mode for the sirens on the beaches j or a discussion of appropriate actions to take; and the document references i going indoors if the siren is heard, whereas most transients would either be in or on the waters, on the beaches, at the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge, or shopping in one of the communities. the map does not describe or indicate the appropriate evacuation routes. e the text of the evacuation route for Salisbury is inconsistent with that described in Appendix J. 1

'1 I A-21 APPENDIX A Attachment A EMERGENCY INFORMATION DECALS These deca.ls, available in both English and bilingual English/ French, use a simple format to provide a br.ef description of notification procedures and identification of EBS stations. Primarily intended for display at places of business and at special facilities, they are also mailed to EPZ residents and are a useful addition to the Calendar document. LETTER TO HOTEL / MOTEL / RESTAURANT OWNERS AND LETTER TO i EMPLOYERS These virtually identical letters request cooperation in distributing an accompanying set of materials (stickers, posters, brochures, etc ). The letters are straightforward, factual, and should pose no problems in interpretation. EMERGENCY INSTRUCTIONS FLYER FOR RESIDENTS OF MERRIMAC. MA. AND NEWTON, NH. This flyer consists of information taken from the text of the emergency [ brochure for Massachusetts and placed in an 8.5" x 11" back-to-back format. t It includes information about notification, EBS systems serving the area, l sheltering, evacuation, Reception Centers, procedures for school children and those with special needs. The flyer includes contact phone numbers for further information as well as the addresses for Reception Centers for the towns of Merrimac and Newton. There is no map of the plume EPZ provided. The flyer is action-oriented and well sequenced to provide emergency information to the reader. EMERGENCY INSTRUCTIONS FLYER FOR RESIDENTS OF AMESBURY, NEWBURY, NEWBURYPORT, SALISBURY, AND WEST NEWBURY, MA., AND SEABROOK AND SOUTH HAMPTON, NH. This flyer is identical to the one above except it is revised to include information relevant to appropriate towns. Since most of these communities border the beaches or have residents on the beaches, it is inadequate because it does not describe the concept of precautionary evacuation and/or shelter for the beaches. BILINGUAL ENGLISH/ FRENCH POSTER ENTITLED MASSACHUSETTS EMERGENCY PLAN INFORMATION This 11.5" x 13" poster includes renditions in both English and French of emergency action information for the area around Seabrook. It features a large and legible EPZ map with clearly marked evacuation routes, small inset maps indicating the location of Reception Centers, and written evacuation directions. If posted outdoors, it d 1d need to be printed in waterproof and fadeproof materials so that its legibility over a period of time could be ensured. Since most of these communities border the beaches or have

.[ td l-J q gr LA-22 APPENDIX A-. (i; ~Attachmens'A-03 .~ 9j residents on tne beaches, it is inadequate. because it does not describe. the ~ 1 > concept of precautionary evacuation and/or shelter for the beaches. en, REQUEST CARD FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION This card apparently accompanies the.. earlier.identifie'd letters to businesses L and -employers..It is simple and straightforward. The card 'is a valuable. s s adjunct to the dissemination effort. h POSTER ENTITLED EMERGENCY INFORMATION,FOR SEABROOK STATIONL .This poster is apparently intended to be displayed in public places. The poster. provides information about'what to do if a siren is heard. - Specifically,; the ;eader is advised to tune to an EBS station for instructions. This-poster is bold, uncluttered, and effective in its format and design. A double sized bilingual version is also provided. POSTERS ENTITLED MASSACHUSETTS EMERGENCY PLAN INFORMATION .WITH EPZ MAP 4 .q.,. These large,.17.5" x 23", and impressive posters provide a summary of emergency actions, school and bus route information, a clearly marked EPZ L map, and explicit evacuation instructions.. An English-only and a bilingual version is provided. These posters, if appropriately posted, could provide persons who are in places of work or leisure with secess to needed Information at the time of an emergency. Note, as mentioned above, the evacuation route description for Salisbury is inconsistent with that described in Appendix J of the Plan. FOLD-OUT POSTER T PE DOCUMENT ENTITLED EMERGENCY BUS INFORMATION p This 8.5" x 11" (opens to 17" x 22") poster-type document is produced in both English and French versions and provides specific bus route maps for six Massachusetts communities. The document is two-sided with detailed maps for three towns on each side. The maps are legible, and bus information is clearly presented. IF YOU HAVE SPECIAL NEEDS POSTER OR AD This is a single page notice of a special needs survey in the area. Graphics and i typography are effectively used to reinforce the message. The distribution of j this notice to newspapers, social agencies, religious organizations, etc., should j assist in compiling a more complete database of special needs populations. I

A-23 APPENDIX A Attact..ent A 4... J' ' SIGNS Descriptions of signs were not provided. It is our assumption that the i Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the local communities would not allow such signs to be erected on the public beaches, boat launch ramps, etc. However, an appropriate sign should be erected for those persons entering the Parker River National Wildlifs Refuge on Plum Island. j EMERGENCY INFORMATION FOR FARMERS This document could serve as the public education document for the entire Seabrook Ingestion EPZ. The document is prepared on the basis of a joint l Issuance between NHY ORO, the State of New Hampshire, and the State of Maine. It centains a 24-hour information Hotline and contains rumor control I numbers for eeth organization. The document describes the means of notification for those farmers living within the plume EPZ and it describes the f means of notification for those farmers living between 10 and 50 miles. The document descrioes Protective Actions for persons and for farm animals. The document describes a process for reentry into an evacuated area in the event farmers need to return to their farms. The document describes the two levels of emergency actions that could be taken in the event there was measured contamination in foodstuffs. The document contains advice for assisting the farmers in preparing an emergency plan for their farms. 4 4 i I l i}}

ML20247G505

Text

- - - - -

Navigation menu

Search