ML17317B246

Requests NRC Hold Public Hearings Re Util Application to Increase Nuclear Waste Storage Capacity

ML17317B246
Person / Time
Site:	Cook
Issue date:	05/09/1979
From:	Levin C SENATE
To:	Hendrie J NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML17317B245	List: ML17317B244 ML17317B246
References
NUDOCS 7906070290
Download: ML17317B246 (108)

Text

CARL LEVIN t$f CHIOAN

)'

'Rl.'nHeb Wf~fee Wenrde WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510 May 9, 1979 Mr. Joseph M. Hendrie Nuclear Regulatory Corrnission Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Mr. Hendrie:

I want to encourage the Nuclear Regulatoxy Comnission to hold a public hearing on Indiana and Michigan Power Co~y's application to increase nuclear waste storage capacity at its Cook plant in western Michigan. Our nation is in a period in which many people have lost faith in their govexnIrent's resolve to do the right thing, particularly regarding nuclear power. And we should do anyt1~g we can to help restore public confidence in government and give people the opportunity to voice their opinions.

Because persons with objections to the Cook plans inadvertently were not notified by the NRC, they did not have the opportunity to call for .a hearing at an earlier stage. I am told, however, that persons with specific objections can ask for a public hearing within 45 days after the plans are reviewed and approved by the NRC. I think you should extend the opportunity that was missed earlier and make evexy effort to hear and consider all sides in this decision. No one should be able to fairly say that the regulatory process was a sham in this case.

As you may knur, I have called for a oratorium on nuclear power plant construction not already underway. I am concerned about nuclear power plant accidents, lmr-level radiation and waste. I have serious doubt about our long-term ability to deal with the dangerous waste generated by the nuclear power plants. But I have not ca1led for a shutdown of operating nuclear power-plants or plants under construction, and I realize we have to store the waste being generated by these plants.

I understand the need to expand waste facilities. The only alternative would seem to be transportation of the waste to another storage site, and that would be dangerous for a number of reasons.

It does seem to me that requests for mare storage space oonfixm my doubts about the nuclear pcmer plant industxy's ability to solve the waste problem. Consumers Power, for example, is asking for mre waste storage space for its Midland, Michigan, pcwer plant that is construction.

still under My doubts aside, I think the Cook situation calls for an extra effort, by the government to be responsive to its citizens.

Sincerely, Carl Levin U.S. Senator Ogp~

I P

4 Qo ~

f

I C'ARL LEVIN MICNIOAN C

~JPnifeb Wfnfee &enable 9 q 0cP WASHINGTON. D.C. 205 I 0 g~+V g May 9, 1979 Mr. Joseph M. Hendrie oepo" 0.

NI. uclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Mr. Hendrie:

I want to encourage the Nuclear Regulatory Coamissian to hold a public hearing on Indiana and Michigan Poorer CoIopany's application to increase nuclear waste storage capacity at its Cook plant in western Michigan. Our nation is in a period in which many people have lost faith in their government's resolve to do the right thing, p-Irticularly regarding nuclear power. And we should do anytt~g we can to help restore public confidence in government and give people the opportunity to voice their opinions.

Because persons with objections to the Cook plans inadvertently were not notified by the NRC, they did not have the opportIzu.ty to call for a hearing at an earlier stage. I am told, however, that persons with. specific objections can Mk for a public hearing within 45 days after the plans are reviewed and approved by the NRC. I think you should extend the opportunity that was missed earlier and make every effort to hear and consider all sides in this decision. No one should be able to fairly say that the regulatory process was a sham in this case+

As you may know,. I have called for a IInratorium on nuclear pcarer construction not already underway. I am concerned about nuclear 'lant pcs~ plant accidents, lmr-level radiation and waste. I have serious doubt about our long-term ability to deal with the dangerous waste generated by the nuclear power plants. But I have not called for a shutdown of'perating nuclear power plants or plants under construction, and I ~ze we have to store the waste being generated by these plants.

I understand the need to expand waste facilities. The only alternative would seem to be transportation of the waste to another storage site, and that would be dangerous for a numLmr of reasons.

It does seem to ae that requests for mre storage space confirm np doubts about the nuclear power plant industry's ability to solve the waste problem.. Consumers Pmer~ for example, is asking for a+re waste storage space for its Midland, Michigan, power plant that is still under construction.

My doubts aside, I think the Cook situation calls for an extra effort, by the government to be responsive to its citizens.

Sincerely, Carl Levin U.S. Senator

OCT 04 1S78 The Honorable Robert P. Griffin United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator Griffin:

As requested by your referral of September 15, 1978, enclosed is a copy of a letter to Mr. James C. HcGahey responding to his letter of September 8. 1978 to Dr. Clifford Y. Smith, Director of the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards at t(RC.

Sincerely, (signed) iVilliamS. DirclN Director DctIV!, l.xccutivc (o 011 "rn!inns

Enclosure:

stated

~

As DISTRIBUTION EDO-04555 EDO R/F MMal sch RFonner DSSS.-

OCA (3)

OELD OELD R/F SECY-781353 Central File OPPI C 2 W EL EDO J SVRNAMSW R r:ph LYGossick

....t..a.3.s.ch---. H.KSjlpp.C,r..........,

OATS'g 9/28/78 gg.F/78 0/V/78 IQ/g/78 NRC FORM 318 (9-76) NRCM 0240 A V; So OOVSRNMSNT PRINTINO OPPICS< ISTS S2S 024

~ ~ ~

f 1

Q

)

~

] '"y Ocr) p)g'(j, f "r)ff c) l

OCT 3 )978 th'. James C. McGahey, President United Plant Guard Morkers of America 25510 Kelly Road Roseville, Michigan 48066

Dear ter. HcGahey:

In your letter of September 8, 1978 to Dr. Clifford V. Smith, Director of the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, you raised several questions about the employment of sec'urity guards at the Donald C. Cook nuclear power plant in Bridgman, tlichigan. Of particular concern to you is the fact that the utility is obtaining a new security force contractor by bidding. You suggest NRC can through some applica-tion of "federal policyn prevent the change.

I know this answer will disappoint you, but the truth is that as a general matter NRC has no author ity to intervene in the hiring practices of a utility for guards. NRC has recently. through rulemaking, estab-lished some guard qualification, training, and equipment requirements but these requirements may be met by either proprietary or contract guard force. (The net] regulation was published in the Federal Register on August 23, 1978 and will be effective on October 23, 1978 - a copy is enclosed). Accordingly, NRC is in no position to institute "remedial action" as requested in your letter.

Me this would be happy to discuss this subject with you further, would be useful. Me certainly would be concerned if if, f'r you think example, it appeared that a switch from a proprietary to a contract guard force did, contrary to our expectations, impact significantly on the effec-tiveness of the guard force.

Sincerely, (StgncIi) qVnttam J. birch i,Tccutivc DjTccto'c

~

gcputy fpT OpcTationa

Enclosure:

D I STR I BUT ION Federal Register Notice M. Malsch R. Former See previous yellow for OELD concurrences OELD R/F orrIcs~ G. McCorkle SURNAME W ~

EDO

--E4O-RIf F-OATS'O/+/7S Central Fil NRC FOR1If 31S (9-76) NRCM 0240 4 Uo S, OOVSRNMSNT PRINTINO OrrICSI IDTd d244d2d

~ ~

Jl ~ W I'Jl Ih

~ i tt

'h F I h 4

~

'4

~

~

Jt

~ I ,'

)8

-~

II h

~ I g' ~

Ih "II

~ ~

'J I 4

I 1i

~

1~

~

k II I

IJ

'l I

I

~ a CP 1

J I

F'I

~

=h

.ht 1

~I

't I II J ~ I h C I

I ~

I v

~

F I

F I

I II I

I t

'I ~ hh JJ4

Mr. James 'C. McGahey, President United Plant Guard llorker s of America 25510 Kelly Road Roseville, Michigan 48066

Dear Mr. McGahey:

In you letter of September 8, 1978 t Dr. Clifford V. Smith, Director of the Office of Nuclear Material Safe and Safeguards, you raised several questions about the emplo ent of security guards at the Donald C. Cook 'nuclear power pla in Bridgman, Michigan. Of particular concern to you is the fact that he utility is obtaining a new security force contractor by bidding. u suggest NRC can through some applica-tion of "federal policy" prev t the change.

I know this answer will dis ppoint you, -but the truth is that NRC has no authority to intervene n the hiring practices of a utility for guards.

NRC has recently. throug rulemaking, established some guard qualification, training, and equipment equirements but these requirements may be met by either proprietary contract guard force. (The new regulation was published in the Fede 1 Register on August 23, 1978 and will be effective on October 23, 1978 a copy is enclosed)., Our attorneys advise me, however, that while IRC may under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. prescribe guard qualification, training, and equipment for the physical pro ction of a licensed facility. the Act gives NRC no authority in th area of utility union relationships. Accordingly, NRC is in no p sition to institute "remedial action" as requested in your letter.

Sincerely yours, En osure DISTRIBUTION M. Malsch LgQ R. Former OELD OELD Reading C. Smith G. McCorkle OrEICE~ ELD - ----- EDO

~IPI II-SIIIINAMEW Form 6: h IIATE~ 9 /78 NRC POR1If 318 (9-76) NRCM 0240 6 Ue So OOVEIINMENT PRIN?INO OSEICEI I074 424 424

<<Vltl,l<<

r<< I rhI .4 ll. ~ ~

4 C 'I t 4 C t F

I 4

.r I

','Ur" l'I

~ 4 l I

~

4 l<<l Fh rr . 444\I I

4 l

4 4 4 ht'I 44 P 44 hr tf n

FV 4

<< ' 4 f r

'h I ~

Iti

~

'4 ~,

4 4

• 4 4 <<l

.f4 'n 4 ll ",

4 I'l 4 t' h

4I I I 4 4 ~ <<, cr 'I r'4, 4

ll

'"c ~ " I

$ 4 I

I 4 4

H IS<<IC

t 4:

14 +

jt~i I ~% tf RULES AND REG ULATIONS 3V421 I

itself. The same reaso that support unless'hdviscd to the co trary. accordingly (Secs. 81. 161b, Pub. L. 8 703. as amended.

a bar on such fiUngs w th the Commis- reflects inclusion of thc 4 day period which

~ 68 Stat. 035, 948 (42 U.S. . 2111, 2201); sec.

sion also support a pr ltbttton against that statute allows for such review (44 201, Pub. L 93-438, as . ncnded. 88 Stat.

VD.C. 3512(cX2)). 1242 (42 U.S.C. 5841).)

fiUngs with the subor inate adjudica-tory bodies in the C mmission. The FOR FURTHER FORMATION Dated at Bethesda, d., this 8th day Commission has decid d to amend its CONTACT: of August 1978.

regulations accordingl Edward Podolak, fice of Stand- For the Nuclear R gulatory Com-EFFECTIVE DATE: A )gust 23, 1978. ards Development, S. Nuclear Reg- mission. =

FOR FURTHER I FORMATION ulatory Commissio Washington, Lzg Gosslct(,

CONTACT: D.C. 20555, phone 30 -443-5946. Execu ive Director Stephen S. Ostrach, Esq.. Office of SUPPLEMENTARY I 0RMATION: r Opera tions.

the General Couns , U.S. Nuclear Presently, applicatio for the medical [ oc. 78-23340 Filed 78: 8:45 am)

Regulatory Comm ion, Washing- use of byproduct mat ial are filed on ton, D.C. 20555. 202- 34-3224. the general appUcatfo form AEC-313 with the aid of a edical Ucensing 590-01]

SUPPLEMENTARY I FORMATION: guide (NUREG-0338, ev. 1) which re-Because this amend ent relates to quests information n essary for and ART 73 PHYSICAL PROTECTION OF matters of fnternal ency practice, specific to the med al appUcation. PLANTS AND'ATERIALS general notice of. prop sed rulemakfng Form AEC-313 does ot have enough fs unnecessary. space and does not sp (t iffealty address Security Personnel Qualification Pursuant to sectto 161 of the much of the fnformat on requested in Training and Equipmont Requirements Atomic Energy Act of 1954, 42 U.S.C. the medical Ucensin guide. A new 2201 and to 5 U.S.C. 552b(g) and 5 form NRC-313M has been developed AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S.C. 553, the next to last sentence of specifically for the edical appUca- Commission.

10 CFR 9.103 ls amend d to read: tion. Form NRC-3 3M does not ACTION: Final rule.

change the substanti 0 requirements

$ 9.103 i General provisio S. that must bc met b applicants for

SUMMARY

On July 5, 1977, the

' 'uch stateme ts may not be medical licenses. The information re- Commission published for public com-pleaded, cited, or reU d upon before quired on the new fo is the same as ment proposed amendments to the the Commtssfon or in any proceeding that currently identff ed In the medi- Commission's regulations to impose under part 2 of these regulations (10 cal Ucensing guide. wever, because upgraded guard quattffcatton, training, CFR part 2) except as he Commission the new form NRC-31 )M fs taUored to and equipping requirements for sccuri-may direct. the medical licensing uide, it is easier ty personnel protecting against theft Dated at Washing n, D.C., thts for the licensee to us and, on a trial of special nuclear materials and indus-17th day of August 19 r basis, has resulted in less correspon- trial sabotage of nuclear faciUties or dence between NRC and the appU- nuclear shipments For the Commfssion. cants regarding defi encies fn their In response to pubUc comments, the SAbr 81. J. CHIu(, applications. training and quaUficatlons section of Sccrctar71 of th Commission. Form NRC-313M an the medical U- thc proposed amendments has been (FR oc. '18-23588 Filed 78: 8:45 am] censing guide are av fable from the extensively revised to specify perform-Radfotsotopes Lfcensir g Branch, Divi- ance oriented requirements instead of sion of Fuel Cycle and Material the detailed training requirements as

'P5 0-01j Safety, OfQce of NLIclear Material originally proposed on July 5, 1977.

Safety and Safeguard , U.S. Nuclear The performance oriented require-PART 35 HUMA USES OF Regulatory Commtssf n, Washington, ments give licensees flexlbiUty fn se-IIYPRODUCT M TERIAL D.C. lecting and developing thc most cost-20555.'ecause this notice relates to mat effective training programs to meet Application Form P r Materials ters of agency manag ent and proce- site specific needs. The Nuclear Regu-dure, general notice o proposed rufe- latory Commission now fs publishing License M d ical making and public pr cedure thereon these revised amendments in final AGENCY: U.S. Nuc) ar Regulatory are unnecessary and he amendment form.

Commission (NRC). can be effective 75 da s after publica- Concurrent with publication of these tfon. amendments, the NRC is issuing for ACTION: Final rule. Pursuant to the A Ic Energy Act pubUc comment guidance documents

SUMMARY

NRC fs ending its reg- of 1954, as amended, t e Energy Rcor- to assist the licensee in the develop-1 ulatfons to require us of a new form gamfzatton Act of 19)t 4, as amended ment of security personnel training NRC-313M, "AppUcat ons for Matcri- and sections 552 and 53 of title 5 of and quaUffcations plans required by als Lfccnse Medical" The new form the United States Co e, the foUowfng the amendments. The effective date of fs easier to ffft out th n the one it re- amendmcnts to Title 10, Chapter I, the revised requirements has been set places, and, on a trial asfs, has result- Code of Federal Re iations, Part 35 to permit pubUc comment on the guid-ed fn reduced corresp dence botwcen are published as a doc ment subject to ance and its issuance in final form at NRC and the applic ts regarding de- codification. the time the requirements become ef-ficfcncfes in their appl catfons. A new section f35. Is added which fective..

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 6, reads as follows: EFFECTIVE DATE: October 23; 1978.

1978. li- 'Rom.-The Nuclear Rggu)atory'ommis-g 33.4 Application forrl for specific NoTr.-Thc Nuc)csr R "ulatory Commis. ccnscs. sion has submitted this rule to the Comp.

General for review of its reporting sion has submitted this ulc to thc Comp.

troller General for such ccvicw as rllay bc human AppUcations for spe ific licenses for (roger rcquircmcnts under the Fcdcrai Reports appropriate under the F eral Reports Act, usc under H 5.11, 35.12, and Act. as amended. 44 U.S.C. 3512. The date as amended, 44 V.S.C. 512. The drltc on 35.13 shall be filed n form NRC- on which thc reporting requfrcmcrlt of the which the reporting ( cordkecpfng) re. 313M, "AppUcatton f r Materials Li- rule bccomcs c(fcctivc. untcss advised Io the qulrcmcnt ot this rule lccomcs effective, cense Medical." contrary. includes a 45*day period which FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 43, t(O. 154 WKDt(ESDAY, AUGUST 23, )978 e

~

/ ~

3V422 IIULBS ANI) REGULATiONS 't that statute allov:s tor Comptro)lcr General 2. NUREG-0465, "Transportation criteria, in order to assure that, securi-review <44 U.S.C. 3512(c)(2)). Security Personnel Training Manual," ty personnel possess the required skill, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION arid knowledge and ability to perform as-CONTACT: 3. Regulatory Gufde 5.52, "Standard signed security Job duties; (9) thc cri-Format and Content for the Physical teria which specify certain require-Mr. R. J. Jones, Chief Materials Pro- Protectfon Section of a I fcense Appli- ments for security management. and tection Standards Branch, Division cation <For Facilities Other Than Nu- security supervisors have been deleted; of Siting, Health and Safeguards clear Power Plants)," Revised Chapter (10) the criteria for weapons training Standards, Office of Standards De- 4. "Security Organization," and Chap- )lave been revised and the number of velopment, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory ter 18, "Security Personnel." training hours has been deleted; (11)

Commission, Washington, D.C. Copies of these three guidance docu- weapons qualification criteria have been simplified and clarified; (12) the

's 'ot ments are being sent to persons who 20555, 301-443-5907.

have expressed an interest In this "' limited to ' '",

SUPPLZMENTARY INFORMATION: matter.

In 1975; the security agency study by September Comments are being requested phrases and "' appropriate ' '" have 1978 so that final been deleted; (13) the period of time (NUREG-0015, ES) concluded thai, guidance can be22, by the time for submittal of a licensee "Creation of a Federal guard force for the rulc becomes published

'llotted effective October 23, plan to implement these proposed re.

maintaining securfty in the nuclear in- 19V8. quirements has been lengthened from dustry would not result in a higher A fourth document specific for nu- 30 to 120 days for fuel cycle facilities degree of guard force effectiveness dear power plants, "Nuclear Security and tranportation and 300 days for:

than can be achieved by the use of pri- Personel for Power Plants, NUREG- power reactors; and (14) fuel cycle fa- ~

vate guards properly qualified, trained 0219, Draft 2," was published for com- cility and transportation licensees and certified (by the NRC)." In 19V6. a ment fn April 1978. This document has plans would be followed by 180 days Joint ERDA-NRC task force was been revised and published in final after the effective date of the rule or formed to propose a plan of action for form. Copies of these doucmcnts also 60 days after NRC approval of the improving the controls and protection will be placed in the Commission's plan, whichever fs )ater, and power re-of nuclear Iflaterfafs at NRC lfcensed Public Document Room at, 1717 H actor licensees plans would be followed, fuel cycle facilftfes. The task force ad. Street NW., Washfngton, D.C. Single by 500 days after the effective date of dressed the current status and future copies of these four guidance docu- the rule or 60 days after the approval direction of physical security protec- ments may be obtained by writing to of the plan, whichever fs later.

tion at NRC licensed fuel cycle facilf- the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commis- The following discussion pertains to tfes now fn possession of certain quan- sion. Attention: Bernadine Scharf. Dis- Items (1) through (14) above.

'tities of special nuclear materials. The tribution Services Branch, Washing- (1) Titles and def(nitions. Com-,

task force report issued in July 1976 ton. D.C. 20555. menters stated that titles and defini-included conclusions and rccommenda- Significant dffferenccs from the pro- tions contained fn appendix B should tlons which provide a basis for rule- posed rule published for comment; on be Ilmited and clarified and suggested .

. making. The Nuclear Regulatory Com-July 5, 19VV are: (1) titles and deffnf- that all dcfinilfons appHcable to 10 mission has determined, as a result of tions used fn appendix B have been CFR part 73 and appendix B should the security agency study conclusions, clarfffed and moved to 10 CFR V3;2 to be located in 10 CFR 73.2.

thc Joint task force findings and other be consolidated with other definitions In response to these comments the subsequent dellberatlons, that security applicable to 10 CFR part 73; (2) em- Commission has decided to limit, the personnel qualification and training ployment suitablity criteria have been number of titles used, to clarify such requfrements should be upgraded revised Lo be less restrictive on the titles. and to remove titles and definf.

through public rulemaking. On July 5, hiring of unarmed security personnel, tions from appendix B. Accordingly,

• 1977, the Nuclear Regulatory Commis-and more specific on the hiring of titles and definitions of fob dutfes, es.

sion published in the FRDLslaL Rsors- armed security personnel; (3) physical sentfal to the effective operation of a xRR (42 FR 34321) proposed amend- qualification criteria have been revised licensee security system, have been ments to 10 CFR part V3 of its regula- to require physical examinations and- for clarified, the term "armed escort" has tions. Interested'persons were invited central alarm station operators been added and defined, and titles and to submit written comments and sug- ria armed security personnel; (4) the crite- definitions have been included in 10 gestions on the proposed amendments for vision and hearing capability CFR 73.2.

within 45 days after publication fn the have been revised for clarification pur- (2) SuitabQity critcri<L Some com-FEDERAL RFAISTFR. The comment poses, and to permit the use of hear- menters rccommendeg that, criteria period was subsequently extended 30 .teria; ing aids to qualifty to the hearing cri- for suitability and physical qualifica-days. Based on the public comments (5) mental qualffications criteria tion be deleted. Some commenters the re-have been revised to delete qualificat-.

and other considerations, the Commis- quirement for psychological testing stated that in view of the fact that Lhe sion has adopted the proposed amend- unarmed security personnel, except, of age of ma]ority for voting. Joining the armed services and entering into legal ments, with modifications as set forth for central alarm station operators, transactions is 18 years, a minimum below. and to allow for some flexfbflftyin the age of 21 years'for hiring security per-

'In adopting these amendments the licensee psychological evaluation pro- sonnel would present legal problelns if Commfssion decided that the rcqulre- gram; (6) physical fitness challenged under equal employment, mcnts should not be made. effective ionss criteria have been revised to laws. Other commenters stated that until gufdancc had been'published to permit each Ifcensce to develop physi- the criteria for a high school diploma.

assist the )fcensccs In developing their cal fitness requirements to meet site or equiva)ent and the prohibition

~

security personnel training and quail. specific needs; (7) contract security agafnst felony convictions should be fications plans. Concurrent with the personnel criterion has been revised to clarified to avoid any complications publication of these amendments, be job related; (8) training and qualifi- that might arise because of employ-

'hree guidance documents are being cations crfte@a have been completely ment opportunity laws.

published for public comment. These revised to delete specified training In response to these comme)Its Lhe are: courses and Instead rewritten to re- Commission has decided: <a) Lo permit

1. NUREG-0464 "SILe Sccurlty Pcr.

~ quire the licensee to develop a plan licensees to employ unarmed securitv sonncl Training Manual," that he will usc LD meet the proposed personnel under 21 years of age; (b) to 0

fEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 43, NO. 164 WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 23, 1978

RULES AND REGULATIONS 37423 r

elaborate on the meaning of high member to bc examined by a licensed cilities and in transportation because school equivalent: and (c) to be more clinical psychologist or psychiatrist is training in itself would not measure an explicit regarding types of felony con- unnecessary and overly restrictive. and individual's capability to perform as-victions to bc considered. The rule has that adequate psychological screening signed security job duties. In addition, been changed trr clarify the meaning is within the capabilities of a gcncral commenters stated that there ap-

. of high school equivalent, fn terms of physfcian who has experience In such peared to be much duplication among Job connection, and in requiring no matters. Other commenters stated the proposed training programs, and felony convictions to show a direct re- that an option to the mental cxamlna- that training programs and facilities latfonship between a felony conviction tion should bc available, and suggest would more properly be designed and and the specific Job assignment being that Individuals employed by the same fmplemented on a site specific basis.

sought. However, the Commission be- firm for more than 2 years with no In response to these comments the lieves that because of the high level of sign of emotional instability should be Commission has decided that, because responsibility assocfated with the Job excused from taking thc mental exam- of site specific requirements as they duties of armed personnel, suitability ination. relate to security hardware, physical crfteria are necessary. Accordfngfy, the In response to these comments the barriers, material access and vital minimum age requirement of 21 years Commission has determined that: (a) areas, alarm systems, and procedures has been retained for armed security psychological evaluations should be required to implement a licensee's personnel. administered by a licensed psycholo- physical security and contingency (3) Physfcal qualificatfons crfterfa. gist, or psychiatrist, or physician or plans, the training and qualifications Some commenters stated that the ri- other person professionally trained to criteria should be revised to give the li-gidity of physical qualifications would identify emotional instability; (b) per- censee greater latitude to design and severely limit the number of candi- sons other than armed personnel and develop site specific training require-dates available to fill security job central alarm station operators need ments and programs to meet site spe-functions and that the. criteria speci- not undergo psychological evaluation; cific needs. In order to accomplish fied would result in a violation of Fed- and (c) the granting og exemptions or this, the training and qualifications eral age and sex discrimination laws. exceptions to NRC requirements, criteria have been revised to require In response to these comments the properly supported and docume'nted, each 1!censee to submit.a training and Commission has decided to delete the will continue to be a licensing respon- qualifications plan which outlines the criteria requiring a physical examina- sibility. Accordingly, mental qualifica- processes by which guards, watchmen, tion for unarmed security personnel tions criteria have been revised to re- armed response persons, armed escorts except for central alarm station opera- quire only armed personnel and cen. and other members of the security or-tors and instead will require such per- tral station operators to undergo psy- ganization will be selected, trained, sonnel to be physically capable of per- chological examination, and to permit equipped, tested, and qualified to formfng assigned security job duties. subsequent identification of possible assure these individuals meet the re-The criteria specifying the require- emotional instability for these and all quirements.

ment for physical examinations have other security personel by normal su- (8) Security management. Com.

been revised to apply only to armed se- pervisory personnel, subject to veriff- menters stated that the criterion curity personnel and central alarm sta- cation by an'ppropriately lfcensed which specifies a training program and tion operators. and trained person. hours of Instruction for managers does (4) Visforr and hearfng crfterfa. (6) Contract security personneL not clearly defoe up to what level of Commenters made the following state- Commenters stated that requirements management would be required to re-ments about the proposed vision and impairm- for contract security personnel should ceive,such trainfng. One commenter hearing criteria; (a) they are overly re- be'ob duty related.

strictive; (b) unarmed security person- In response to these comments the stated tBat rather than requiring spe-nel should not be required to meet the Commission agrccd that contract secu- cific training for management, the criteria; (c) the requirement for recog- rity personnel should be required to NRC should specify minimum qualifi-nizing basic colors should be clarified; meet the same criteria for specific se- cations for the various functions (d) the use of a hearing aid should be curity job tasks and duties that would within management and that the NRC allowed to correct hearing be required for a licensee proprietary should provide any additional security entt; (e) that additional clarification guard for'ce. Accordingly, contract se- training that the NRC deems neces-of these requirements Is essential; and curity personnel criteria have been re- sary.

(f) that ft would be preferable to.speci- vised to be Job related, Just as for in- In response to these comments the fy minimum requirements In terms of house sccurlty personnel. Commission has decided to delete the the better ear. (7) Trafnfng and qualfficatfons. requirement for security management In response to these comments the Some commenters stated that the pro- training. The revised criteria for train-Commfsslon has decided that: (a) un. posed training and qualifications crite- ing and qualifications described in (7) armed security personnel should be ria attempt to be too broad and all In- above will assure the Commission that exempt from vision and hearing re- clusive in scope while sacrificing qual- the proper level of management will quirements unless required by as- ity, indepth educatfon and training. be Involved in the decision making and signed security related task identified Most commenters stated that the over- Implementation process fn the qualifi-In. the licensee's plan; (b) the criteria all concept of specifying in fine detail cation and training of guards.

need to bc clarified; and (c) a hearing each course of instruction, the number (9) 1Veapons training. Most com-aid to correct hearing impairment of hours of instruction for each me>>ters stated that weapons training should bc permitted..Accordingly, the course, the individuals who would be requirements: (a) were excessive with criteria which specify vision and hear- required to attend each course, the do. respect to number of hours of instruc-ing requirements have been revised to: cumenting of names of instructors and tion required; (b) were not clear as to (a) Apply explfcitiy to armed person- places of instruction for each course, who should undergo the training: (c) nel; (b) clarify the rcquirernents; and specific training requirements for li- specified unnecessary training time, (c) permit, the use of a hearing aid to censee management and security 'su- since performance requirements are meet. hearing requirements. pervisory personnel, etc., would not later specified in section IV of appen-(6) Mental qualifications criteri. neccessarily achieve the desired obJcc- dix 13; and (d) did not, take into ac.

Some commenters stated that the re- tive of uniformly upgrading the qual- count individuals wit,h previous weap-qulremcnt for each security force It,v of security personnel at licensed fa- ons experience.

FEDERAL'EGISTER, VOL 43, NO. 164 WEDNESDAY, AUGUSZ 23, 1970

RULES ANO RMGULATIOMS I

In, response to these comments the fications programs. The Commission (CEQ) and National En'vironmental Commission has decided that the believes that the revised rule will Policy Act (NEPA) guidelines in light.

weapons training criteria should be assure the upgraded quality of licens- of. the comments rcceivcd and contin-stated in terms that would permit ee security personnel so that opcn- ues to believe that an environmental flexibility with respect to hours of in- cnded, suggestive wording is unneces- impact statement for the proposed struction required based on an individ; sary. amendments to 10 CFR Part 'l3 is not ual's experience and to permit'the li- (12) and (13) Licensee plan subinit- required. The m'ain effect of the rule censee to identify by security related tal and implementation. Commenters is to require training and qualification job tasks or duties, which individuals ~

stated that the Commission did not of security personnel and is basically would be required to qualify with provide for adequate time to develop a procedural, with no environmental weapons and the weapon with which plan in response to the proposed re. ef feet worth noting.

~ they would qualify. To effect this quirements, or provide sufficient time (3) Guard upgrading. One com-change the weapons training criteria to implement the plan after it has menter stated that the entire upgrad.

have been revised to delete the been approved. ing of guard qualification, training number of hours of training required The Commission agrees that ade; and equipping was unwarranted be-to give the licensee the requisite.flexi- 'quate time must be allowed for proper cause his facility maintains liaison bility in determining by jon. assign- planning and implementation to with local law enforcement authorities ment who will receive training and the assure effective programs. The rule and that the local authorities have su-extent of training required to qualify has been changed to allow more time perior manpower, training and equip.

with the assigned weapon. for planning and implementation. ment t,o deal with security contingen-(10) Weapons qualijication. Com- In addition to the comments that re- cies beyond the control. of the site se-menters stated that: (a) It, would be sulted in changes, in the proposed curity organization.

difficult to establish and operate the amendments, a number of other issues Based on the Joint ERDA-NRC firing ranges needed for weapons were commented on which did not Task Force on.Safeguards and the Se-qualification because of training facili- result in changes to the proposed curity Agency Study (SAS) reports, ty limitations; (b) the requirements amendments, but which warrant dis- the Commission decided that the up-for both day and night range firing is cussion and explanation. grading of lfcensee guard quality was not necessary to achieve and maintain Security personnel training necessary. In support of this decision,

'1) ffrfng proficiency; (c) lighting present- manuaL One commenter stated that the Commission also compared the ly required at nuclear facilities would the training manual should not be content and scope of training pro-preempt any need for night firing; and published as a NUREG document if grams submitted by each licensee to (d) firing ranges are not equipped to the manual is intended to demonstrate meet the present requirements with duplicate lighting at nuclear facilities. one acceptable approach to satisfying the guidance the NRC provided This can only be done using military the requirements of the proposed reg- through regulatory guide 5.20. The re-type battlefield illumination sources ulation. sults of this comparison revealed that which are beyond the scope of private The Commission had intended for present training programs for nelv

~

licensees. the training manual to represent a guards would not produce the quality In response to these comments the general course outline for training se- needed to assure the effective protec-Commission has decided: (a) That curity personnel and not to provide tion of special nuclear materials, facili-weapons qualification requirements specific parallel guidance to meet each ties, or shipments.~The fact, that li-should be relaxed to give the licensees of the requirements of appendix B. It censees maintain liaison with local law

~ flexibility in designing their weapons was not intended as a regulatory enforcement authorities was consid-qualifications programs and to permit guide. Thc utility of the training ered in the decision to require up-

~

licensee armed personnel to either fire manual will bo enhanced, as a general graded guard quality, accepting that the course specified or to select an document, in light of the revised proximity to, response time by, and equivalent course of fire; and (b) that amendments. the number of responding local au-it fs necessary to 'require armed indi- (2) Environmental impact state- thorities could bear on the degree of a

viduals to perform nighttime or simu- ment. A few commenters stated that upgrading that would be required in lated nighttime firing for familiariza- as a practical matter the drastic in- onsite response force numbers and tac-tion only, because of the varying psy- crease in security personnel training tical training requirements.

chological effects on 'persons not ac- requirements proposed by the amend- (4) Tear gas or mace. Numerous com-customed to night firing. Accordingly, ments would undoubtedly require ad- ments were made that the,use of tear,,

weapons qualification criteria have ditional security, administrative, and gas or mace would violate certain been revised to permit the licensee to recordkeeping staff, therefore affect State laws which prohibit thc use of either select the course of fire speci- ing other persons rather than dealing sucli substances by private citizens.

fied or to choose an equivalent course only with f,he training of existing secu- Tear gas or other nonlethal gases will of fire to qualify. armed personnel. In rity personnel; involve the potential continue to be required, and where addition, the criteria requires individ- employment rights and opportunities State,law prohibits such possession uals to qualify only with assigned of numerous existing and future secu- and.use by private citizens, adequately weapons as identified in the licensee's rity personnel; and fnvolve the poten- supported requests for exemption may plan. tial Lssuance of advanced weaponry to be granted or* equivalent alternative (1'1) Suggestive phrases. Commeriters private security forces. They believed prof ectfon measures'may be proposed not limited to propriate ' ',"

noted that, phrases such as "'. ' but

'," were and "' 's ap.

suggestive, not that the Commission has too narrowly .In conjunctfon with a request for ex-construed the term "environment" ception from the specific requirement.

contrary to Commiss'ion policy as (5) Costs. There werc a few com-definitive, and implicitly require more stated in 10 CFR 51.1(a), concluding ments made"relative to costs to imple-

.to be done. that an environmental impact state- ment the proposed rcqulrements. One Thc criteria in, appendix" B have ment is required to satisfy NRC's obli- commenter did provide. a cost estimate been changed to climinatc these gations under NEPA and CEQ guide- for training his existing guard force phrases. As revised, the requirements lines. plus annual cost for 'rafning new are stated broadly in terms of capabili- The Commission has reviewed the hires. No basis was given to support, ty and performance to permit flexibil- criteria provided in 10 CFR Part, 51, these or the other estlmatcs. Thc cost

, ity in the design of training and quall- the Council on E>>vironmcntal Quality ef Sect, iveness of alternative training FKDSMAt ffCGISTN, VOL 43, NO. Id4 V/EDHESDAY, AUGUST 23, 197S

gN ~

I

I I

RULES AND REGULATIONS . 3'7425 I

pr(Igrams wlII be investigated as part would necessitate pooling of security availability of instructors with the ex-

. of the logist,ical managcmcnt st,udy personnel from various licensees for pertise necessary to train security per-Identified In paragraph 1. Staff has each class "of students, which would in- sonnel. The results of this study prepared a value. impact assessment crease the probability of unauthorized. should bc available around November which has bccn placed in the public 'disclosure of sensitive and proprietary -15, 1978. These results, along with the document room which provides a licensee physical security system in- experience gained from implementa-breakdown of the cost estimates in- formation. No cost comparison esti- tion of the effective rule, will be used cluding statements of benefit when- mates were provided to support the in the decision making process by thc ever possible. The Important aspect of position of commenters opposed to Commission to determine whether a the proposed regulation, as now writ central or regional training of security more structured system of training of ten, Is that the job related perform- personnel. security personnel should be recom-ance orientation will give the licensee (Ii) Commenters stated that the al- mended to licensees.

greater fiexlbIIIty In developing the ternative of certifying training pro- The Commission has determined most cost-effective training program grams for a specific training center under Council of Environmental Qual-for his plant and transport system. versus certification of security person- ity guidelines and the criteria in 10 (6) A few comments were received in nel would only be acceptable from a CFR Part 51.5(d)(3), that neither an response to the Commission's request cost effective standpoint if each licens- environmental impact statement nor for comments, recommendations, and ee or the employer of the personnel environmental impact appraisal to cost tradeoffs on the alternate ap- could operate its own certified training support a negative declaration for the proaches available for training person- centers. One commenter stated that proposed amendmcnts to 10 CFR Part nel, and the alternative of certifying the requirements should be defined, 73 is required because the amend-training programs vs. certifying of in- methods for certification identified, ments deal primarily with the qualifi-dividuals, to assist the Commission in and actual training programs be made cation and training of existing security arriving at a consensus as to the most available prior to.implementation of personnel and do not directly or Indi-cost-effective approach for conducting the proposed rule. rectly affect the environment.

security personnel training. These (ill) A few commenters provided gen- Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act comments can be categorized generally eralized and unsupported costs for im- of 1954, as amended. the Energy Reor-as follows: plementing the proposed amendments. ganization Act of 1974, as amended, (I) Central and regional training They also expressed concern that they and sections 552 and 553 of title 5 of versus local training. were limited in attracting younger per- the United States Code, notice Is (Ii) Certification of training pro- sonnel who might meet the require- hereby given that the following grams versus certification of individ- ments, and historically, they have ex- amendments to Title 10, Chapter 1, uals. perienced a high turnover rate in secu- Code of Federal Regulations, Part 73 (lii)Training rity personnel which would drive the are published as a document subject to costs for training and retraining even costs.'he following discussion pertains to codification.

items (I) through (Ili) above. higher. 1. Section 73.2 of 10 CFR Part 73 is (I) Comments received were both in The Commission agrees that there am'ended to add - paragraphs (t) favor of and opposed to the need for are economic advantages and disad- through (w).

establishing central or regional train- vantages and other problems associat-ing facIIItics. Persons favoring the es- ed with the alternative means availa- g 73.2 Deiinltlons.

tablishment of central or regional ble for training licensee security pcr- As used ln this part:

training facilities stated that such fa- sonel. The revised amendmcnts tahe cilities could be established by or into consideration the Commission's ~ ~

under contract to the NRC, possibly objective to assure that security per-using existing Federal installations. sonnel quality be uniformly upgraded (t) "Armed response personnel" Since there would be only a few in- at licensee facilities and in transporta- means persons, not necessarily uni-structors available with the expcrtisc tion. This can be achieved by either formed, whose primary duty in the ncccssary to teach some of the courses close coordination with all training event of attempted theft of special nu-required, the staffing of central or re- programs, or by a means for assuring clear material or industrial sabotage gional facilities would not be difficult, that each >erson assigned to perform shall be to respond, armed and whild the simultaneous staffing of lo- security tasks is properly equipped equipped, to prevent or delay such ac.

calized training facilities may not be and qualified to do so. The revised tions.

achievable. Such commenters also amendments follow the latter ap- (u) "Armed escort" means an armed stated that with central or regional proach and do not specifically address personnot necessarily uniformed, training facilities, changes in the Com- training .details. Nevertheless, the whose primary duty Is to accompany mission's regulations could be Imple- Commission is still concerned that shipments of special nuclear material mented directly; and that the skill some level of uniformity of perform-for'the protection of such shipments levels of graduates would be consistent ance should be established for all af- against theft or industrial sabotage.,

throughout the industry. No cost fig- fected licensees. As stated in July (v) "Security management" means ures werc provided by commenters ad'- 1977, the Commission will study alter- persons responsible for sccurlty at the vocating the 'establishment of central native approaches to training person- policy and general management level.

or regional facilitics. nel and the alternative of certifying (w) "Security supervision" means Commenters opposing central or re- training programs or individuals. persons, not necessarily uniformed or gional training facilltics stated that There ls underway a logistical manage- armed. whose primary duties'are su-the expenses for transporting, fccding, ment study which should assist the pervision and direction of security.at and housing individuals at a central or Commission In deciding on the most the day-to day operating level.

regional facilities would add, substan- cost-effective approach available for 2, Paragraphs 73.30(d) and 73.30(e) tially to the cost for training. Under certification, and will provide the li- of 10 CFR Part, 73 arc revised to read clther of thcsc training arrangcmcnts, censees information on the cost effec- as follows:

lt; would bc difficult to provide site tiveness of each of the training altcr-specific training sufficient to meet the nativcs to meet NRC requirements. In g 73.30 General requirements.

needs of each licensee. Additionally, addition, the results of the study regional centers or a central facility should provide information on the FEDERAL REGISTER, Vol. 43, NO. 164 WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 23, 'l918

rI' I ra 3'l~i2G RULES hND REGULATIONS '"

(d) When armed escorts are use d sponse person, and other member of the requirements of this paragraph.

. pursuant to H73.31(c)(1), 73.31(c)(2 ), the security organization shall requa- The training and qualifications plan 73.33, and 73.35, the licenscc shall n ot lify in accordance with appendix B of shall include a schedule to show how permit an individual to act as a n this part at least every 12 months. all security personnel will be qualified armed escort unless such individual Such requalification shall be docu- by (within 2 years after the rule be-has been trained. equipped, and qual I- mented. comes effective) or within 2 years fied to perform each assigned security after the submitted plan Is approved, job duty in accordance with Appendix whichever is later. The training and B, "General Criteria for Security Per- qualifications plan shall be followed sonnel," of this part. Upon the request (h) By (120 days after the rule be- by the licensee after (500 days after comes effective) each licensee shall the rule becomes effective) or 60 days of an authorized representative of the submit a training and qualifications Commission the licensee shall demon- plan outlining the processes by which after the submitted plan is approved strate the ability of the physical secu- guards, watchmen. armed response by the NRC, whichever is later.

rity personnel to carry out their as- persons and other members of the se- 5. A new Appendix B entitled -Gen-signed. duties and responsibilities. curity organization will be selected, eral Criteria for Security Personnel" is Armed escorts shall requalify in ac- trained, equipped, tested, and quali. added to 10 CFR Part, V3 to read as cordance with appendix B of this part fied to assure these Mdividuals meet follows:

at least every 12 months. Such requali- the requirements of paragraph (a)(4)

'icatloII shall be documented. of this section. The training and quali-APPENDIX B GENERAL CRITERIA FOR SECURITF PERSONNEL (e) Prior to transporting special nu- fications plan shall include a schedule clear material subject to the physical to show how all security personnel will TABLE OF CONTENTS protection requirements of this part, be qualified by (within 2 years after IntroductIDIL each licensee shall submit a plan out- the rule becomes effective) or within Definitions.

lining the procedures that will be used two years after the submitted plan is Criteria.

to meet the requirements of 073.30 approved, whichever is later. The L Employment suitability and qualifica-through 73.36 and 73.70(g). By (120 training and qualifications plan shall tion.

days after the rule becomes effective) be followed by the licensee after (180 A. Suitability.

each licensee shall submit a training B. Physical and mental qualifications.

days after the rule becomes effective) ~

C. Physical fitness qualifications.

and qualifications plan outlining the or 60 days after the submitted plan is D. Contract security personnel.

processes by which armed escorts will approved by the NRC, whichever is E. Physical requalification.

be selected, trained, equipped, tested, later. F. Documentation.

and qualified to assure these individ- . ~ -II. Training and quallflcatloILs.

uals meet, the requirements of para- A. Training requirements.

graph (d) of this section. B. Qualification requirements.

The training and qualifications plan 4. Paragraph 73.55(b)(4) of 10 CFR C. Contract personnel.

shall include a schedule to show how Part V3 ls revised to read as follows: D. Security knowledge, skills, and abill.

tICB.

all armed escorts will be qualified by Requirements I'or physical protec-'73.65 E. RequallficatioIL (within 2 years after the rule becomes tion of licensed activities In nuclear III. Weapons training and qualification.

effective) or within 2 years after the power reactors agztlIIst Industrial snbo. IV. Weapons qualification and requalifica.

submitted plan is approved. whichever (age.

t ion program.

is later. The training and qualifica- V. Guard, armed response personnel ~ and tions.plan shall be followed by the li- ' armed escort equipment.

~ ~

A. FIxed site.

censee after (180 days after the rule B. TransportatloIL becomes effective) or 60 days after the (b)(4) Thc licensee shall not permit submitted plan is approved by the an individual to act as a guard, watch- INTRDDUcrIoN NRC, whichever Is later. man. armed response person, or other Pursuant to the provisions of 73.50 and member of the security organization 73.55 of 10 CFR part 73, Requirements for unless such individual has been Physical Protection of Plants and Materials,

3. Paragraph 73.50(a)(4) and 'V3.50(h) trained, equipped, and qualified to each licensee who Is authorized to conduct perform each assigned security job certain activities with specI(lcd quMItltles of of 10 CFR Part 73 are revised to read special nuclear material pursuant to 10 CFR as follows:

duty in accordance with Appendix B, Part 70 and each Ilccnscc who Is authorized "General Criteria for Security Person- to operate a production or utlllzatlon facill ~

$ 73.60 Requirements for physical protec- nel," of this part. Upon thc request of ty pursuant to 10 CFR part 60, respectively, tIDII of licensed activities. an authorized representative of the Is required to establish a security organiza.

. Commission the licensee shall demon- tion,. Including trained and equipped guards

~ ~ ~ strate the ability of thc physical secu- to physically protect BPCcial nuclear materi.

rity personnel to carry out their as- al in their possess/on BIId their facilities (a) ' '4) The licensee shall not signed duties and responsibuities. against theft MId Industrial sabotage.

Further, pursuant to the provisions of permit an individual to act as a guard, Each guard, watchman, armed re-watchman, armed response person, or sponse person, and other member of V3.30 through V3:36 of 10 CFR part 73, cer-other member of the security organiza- the security organization shall rcqua- talII shipments of epeclal nuclear material are rcqulrcd to bc accompanied by armed es-tion unless such individual has been lify in accordance with appendix B of corts.

trained, equipped. and qualified to 'his part at least every 12 months. Security personnel who are responsible perform.each assigned security job Such requalification shall be docu- for the protection of special nuclear materi ~

duty in accordance with Appendix B, mented. By (300 days after the rule al oILslle aIId In transit and for the protec.

."General Criteria for Security Person- becomes effective) each licensee shall tlon of the facility or shipment vehicle nel," of this part. Upon the request of submit a training and qualifications against Industrial sabotage should, IlkC an authorized representative of the plan outlining the processes by which other elements of the bhyslcBI= security system. be required to meet minimum crite.

Commission the licensee shall demon- guards, watchmen, armed response rla to assure thILt they wIII effectively per.

strate the ability of the physical secu- persons, and other mcmbcrs of the se- form Ihe(r asslgIICd security related job rity personnel to carry out their as- curity organization will bc sclccted, duties. In order to assure that those Indivld.

signed duties and responsibilities. trained, equipped, tested, and quail. uaIs responsible for security are properly Each guard, watchman, armed rc- fied to assure these Individuals mcct equipped and qualified to execu(c the Iob FEDNAE REOISTEII, Voto 43, NO. 164 VVEDNESDAY, AUGUST 23, 1978

PUKS ANO REGULATJONS 3V42V duties prescribed fof them, l,he NRC has de. (b) Where corrective eyeglasses are re. C. Physical fltncss qualifications-SubJect, v9)oped general criteria which specifies se. quired, they shall bc of the safety glass to a medical examination conducted v:ithln curity personnel qua))fie>Lion rcqulremenl". type. the preceding 30 days and to a detennlna-These general criteria establish require. (c) The use of corrective eyeglasses or con. tlon and written certification by a licensed ments for thc selection. training. equipping, tact lenses shall not Intcrferc with an Indi. physician that there are no medical contra-testing, and qualification of Individuals who vidual's ability to effectively perform es. indlcaL ns to participation by the Individu-will bc responsible for protecting special nu. signed security job duties during normal or al as disclosed by the medical examination.

clear rnaterlals, nuclear facll!ties, and nuclc. cmcrgency operations. guards. armed response personnel and ar shipments. (2) Hearing. (a) Individuals shall have no armed escorts shall demonstrate physical hcarlru: loss In thc better car greater than fitness fr assigned security Job duties by DzrINrrloNS 30 decibcls average at 500 hz, 1.000 Hz. and perform)ng a practical physical cxcrcise pro-Terms defined In parts 50, 70, and ')3 of 2.000 EIz, with no level greater than 40 decl. gram within a specific time period. The ex-this chapter have the same meaning when bels at any one frequency (by ISO 1964 or ercise program performance objectives shall used in this appendix. ANSI 1969 audiometry). bc described In the licensee training and (b) A hearing aid is accepablc provided qualifications plan, and shall consider such CRITERlh suitable testing procedures demonstrate hu. Job related functions as strenuous activity.

dltory acuity equivalent to the above stated physical exertion, levels of stress, and expo-I. Emp!oyment su!tab)Bty and qualification. requirement. sure to the elements as tney pertain to each A. Suitability: 1. Prior to employment, or individual's assigned security Job duties for assignment to the security organization, an (c) Thc usc of a hearing aid shall not de.

the effective performance of the Indi- both normal and emergency operations. The Individual shall meet the following su)tab)I. crease vidual's assigned security Job duties during physical fitness qualification of each guard, Ity criteria: normal or emergency opcratlons. armed response person and armed escort

~

a. Educational development-Possess a shall be documented and attested'y a li-high school diploma or pass an equivalent tablished (3) Diseases Individuals shall have no es-medical history or medical diagno- censee security supervisor.

performance examination designed to meas- D. Contract security personnel-Contract ure basic Job related mathematical, lan. sis of epilepsy or diabetes, or. where such a condition exists, the Individual shall provide security personnel shall bc required to meet guagc, and reasoning skills, ability, and the suitability, physical, and mental require.

knowledge, required to perform security Job medical evidence that the condition can bc controlled with proper medication so that ments as appropriate to their assigned secu.

duties. rity Job duties in accordance with section I

b. Felony convictions-Have no felony the Individual will not lapse Into a coma or of this appendix.

convictions Involving the use of a weapon unconscious state while performing assigned E. Physical requallflcatlon-At least every and no felony convictions that reflect on security job duties. 12 months, central alarm station operators the Individual's reliability. (4) Addiction-Individuals shall have no es.

tabllshed medical history or medical shall be required to meet the physical re-

2. Prior to employment or ass)gnment to diagno-'is quirements of B.l.b of this section and the security organization ln an armed capac. of habitual alcoholism or drug addiction, guards, armed response personnel and

.Ity, thc Individual, In addition to (a) and (b) or. where such a condition has existed, the armed escorts, shall bc required to meet the above, must be 21 years of age or older. individual shall provide certified documen-physical requirements of paragraphs B.l.b B. Physical and mental qual)Bcations. 1. tation of having completed a rehabilitation (1) and (2), and C of this section.

Physical qualifications: program which would give a reasonable degree of confidence that the individual F. Documentation-The results of suit

a. Individuals whose security tasks and Job abll)Ly, physical, and mental qualifications duties are directly associated with the effec- would be capable of performing assigned se- data and test results shall be documented tive implementation of the licensee physical curity Job duties. by thc licensee or his agent.

sccurlty and cont)ngcncy plans shall have (5) Other physical requirements-An Indi- G. Nothing herein authorizes or requires a no physical weaknesses or abnorma))t)es vidual who has been incapacitated due to a llcenscc to investigate Into or Judge the thaL v:ould adversely affect their perform. serious illness. injury, disease, or operation, reading habits, poll),ical or religious beliefs.

ance of assigned security job duties. which could Interfere with the effective per- or attitudes on social. economic, or politica) b; In addition to a. above, guards, armed formance of assigned security Job duties Issues of any person.

response pcrsonncl, armed escorts, and ccn. shall. prior to resumption of such duties. IL Training and qualifications.

tral alarm station operators shall successful- provide medical evidence of recovery and A. Train)ng requirements-Each lndlvldu.

ly pass a physical examination administered ability to perform such security Job dut)es. al who requires training to performqualificat-assigned by a licensed physician. Thc examination 2. Ifenta) quaBficatlons: a. 'Individuals security related Job tasks or Job duties as shall be designed to measure the lndivld. whose security tasks and Job duties arc di- Identlflcd In the licensee physical security ual's physical ability to pe'rform assigned se- rectly associated with the effective implc- or contingency plans, shall prior to assign-curity Job duties as identified In thc licensee mcntatlon of the licensee physical security ment, bc trained to perform such tasks and physical security and contingency P)ans. and contingency plans shall demonstrate duties In accordance with the licensee or h)s Armed personnel shall meet the following mental alertness and the capabi)ILy to cxcr- agent's documented training and additional physical requirements:

visual acuity in each cyc shall bc correctable clse good Judgment. Implement Instructions, (I) Vision: (a) For each'ndividual. distant ~ assimilate assigned security tasks, and pos.

sess thc acuity of scnscs and ability of ex-ionss plan.

Qua))flcatlon requ)rements-Each person who performs security related Job to 20/30 (Snellcn or equivalent) ln the pression sufficient to permit accurate com- tasks or Job duL)cs required to Imp)ement better eye and 20/40 In the other cyc w'ith munication by v:ritten. spoken. audible, visi- thc licensee physical security or contlngen.

eycglasscs or contact lenses. If uncorrected ble, or other signals required by assigned cy plan shall. prior to being assigned to such distance vision is'not at least 20/40 Jn thc Job duties. tasks or duties, bc qualified in accordance better eyc, the individual shall ca>ry an b. Armed Individuals, and central alarm wiLh thc licensee's NRC approved training extra pair of corrccL)vc )cnses. Near vtsua) station operators, in addition to meeting thc and qualifications plan. The qualifications acuity, corrected or uncorrected, shall bc at requirement stated in paragraph a. above, of each Individual shall bc documented and

)cast 20/40 ln the better eye. Field of vision . shall. have no emotional instability that. attested by a licensee security supervisor.

must be at )cast 70'orizontal meridian ln would Interfere with the effective perform. C. Contract, personnel-Contract pcrsnn-

~

each cyc. Thc ability to distinguish red. ance of assigned security Job duties. The de- ncl shall bc trained, equipped, and qualified green, and yellow colors Is required. Loss of termination shall be made by a licensed psy- as appropriate to their assigned security re-vision In onc eye Is disqualifying. Glaucoma chologisL or psychiatrist. or physician. or lated Job tasks or Job duties, In accordance shall be disqualifying, unless control)cd by other person professionally trained to iden. tvith sections II, III, IV. and V of this ap.

acccptablc medical or surgical means, pro- tlfy emotional instability. pcndlx. The qualifications of each Individu.

vided such medlcatlons as may be used for c. The licensee shall arrange for continued al shall bc documented and attested by a li-control)lng glaucoma do not cause undesira- observai,ion of security pcrsonne) and for censee security supervisor.

ble side effects vrhlch adversely, affect, thc appropriate corrective measures by respon- D. Security knowledge, skills. and abili-Individual's ability to perform assigned su. sible supervisors for indications of emotion: ties-Each Individual assigned to perform curlty Job duties, and provided the visual al Instabi)ILy of individuals in Lhe course of the security related teak Identified In the li-acuity and field of vision rcqulrcmcnts performing assigned security Job duties. cense( physical security or contingency plan stated above are met. On. the-job evaluation Identification oi" emotional instability by re. siva)i demonstrate thc required knowledge.

shall bc used for individuals v:ho cxhlb)L a sponsible supervisors shall be subJcct, to ver- skill. Rnd ability In accordance v;ith the mild eo)or vision dcfcct. ification by a liccnscd. trained person. specified standards for each task as stated FEDERAL REGISTER, VOI 43, NO. )64 WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 23, 1978

37498 RULES AND REGUULTIONS ln thc NRC approved licensee training and 43. Road transport security system ccm- 52. Armed personnel procedures and oper.

qualitications plan. The areas of knowledge, mind and control structure. ation during temporary storage. between skills, and abilities that shall be considered 44. Usc of weapons. mode transfers of shipments.

In the llccnsec's training'nnd qualifications 45. Communications systems operation for 93. Armed escort threat assessment and plan arc as follows: transportation, shtpmenC to control center response.

1. Protection of nuclear facilities. trans. and lntraconvoy. 94. System for and operation of shipment port vehicles, and special nuclear material. 46. Vulnerabllitles and consequences of vehicle lock and key control.

2. NRC requirements and guidance for 95. Tcchnlques and procedures for Isola-theft of special nuclear material or Industrl. tlon of shipment vehicle during a contlngen.

physical security at nuclear facilities and nl sabotage of a transport vehicle. ey situation.

for trallsportatlon. 47. Protection of transport system securi. 96. Transportation coordination with local

3. The private security guard's role in pro- ty information. law enforccmcnt agencies.

viding physical protection for the nuclear 48. Control of area around transport vehi- 97. Procedures for verification of ship.

industry. cle. ment locks and seals.

4.The authority of private guards. 49. Normal convoy techniques and oper-, 98. Transportation security and situation

5. The use of nonlethal weapons. ations. rcportlng, documentation, and report, writ-B. Theuseof deadly force. 50. Familiarization with types of special ing.

Power ot arrest and authority to detain

'I.

nuclear materials shipped. 99. Procedures for shipment delivery nnd individuals. 51. Fixed post, station operations. pickup.

8. Authority to search Individuals and 52. Access control system operation. 100. Transportation security system for seize property. 53. Search techniques and systems for In- escort by road, rail, atr and sca.

9. Adversary group operations. dividuals, packages and vehicles. E. Requallf ication-Security personnel

10. Motlvatlon and objectives of adversary 54. Escort and patrol responsibilities and shall be requalified at least every 12 months groups. operation. to perform assigned security related job

11. Tactics and force that might be used 55. Contengency rcsponsc to confirmed in-tasks and duties for both normal and con-by adversary groups to achieve their objec- trusion or attempted Intrusion. tingency operations. Requallfication shall tives. bc tn accordance with the NRC approved li-

56. Security system operation after com- censee training and qualifications plan. The

12. Recognltlon of sabotage related de- ponent failure.

vlccs and equipment that might be used results of rcqualif ication shall be document-

57. Fixed site security Information protec- ed and attested by a licensee security super-agahlst the licensee's facility or shipment tion. visor.

vehicle. 58. Security coordination with local law III.Weapons training.

13. Facility security organization and op- enforcement agencies. A. Guards, armed response personnel and .

eration. 59. Security and situation reporting, docu. armed escorts requiring weapons training to 14.Types of physical barriers. mentation and rcport writing. perform assigned security related job tasks

15. Weapons, lock and key control system 60. Contingency duties. 'or job duties shall be trained In accordance operation. 61. Selt defense. with thc licensees'ocumented weapons

16. Locatton of SNM and/or vital areas 82. Use of and defenses against Incapaci- tralnlng programs. Each Individual shall be withtn a facility. tating agents. proficient in the use of his assigned

17. Protcctcd ares security and vulnerabil. 63. Security equipment testing. weapon(s) and shall meet prescribed stand.

Ity. 84. Contingency procedures. ards In the following areas:

18. Types of alarm systems used.

65. Night vtston devices and systems.

I Mechanical assembly, dissasembly,

~

19. Response nnd assessment to alarm an- 66. Mechanics of detention.

range penetration capnbllltity of weapon,'nd nunclations and other Indications of Intru- bullseye firing.

67. Basic armed and unarmed defensive 2. Weapons cleaning and storage.

sion.

20. Familiarization with types of special tactics. 3. Combat firing. day and night.

nuclear material processed. 68. Response force deployment. 4. Safe weapons handling.

21. General concepts of flxcd site security 69. Security alert procedures. 5. Clearing, loading, unloading, and re-system".

'10. Securii,y brief lng procedures. loading.

22. Vulnerabllltles nnd consequences of

'll. Response force tactical movement. 6. When to draw and point a weapon.

theft of special nuclear material or industri- -72. Response force withdrawal. 7. Rapid fire techniques.

. al'sabotage of a facility. 73. Rcponse force use of support fire. 8. Close quarter firing.

74. Response to bomb and attack threats. 10. Zeroing assigned wenpon(s).

23. Protection. of security system Infonna-tlon. 75.. Response. to civil disturbances (e.g., IV. Weapons qualification nnd requalifica.

24. Personal equipment usc and operation strikes, demonstrators). tlon program.

for normal and contingency operations. 'lB. Response to confirmed attempted Qualification firing for the handgun and thefC ot special nuclear material and/or In- thc rNc shall be for dayltght firing, and 25: Surveillance and asscssmcnt systems each Individual shall.perform night firing and techniques. dustrial sabotage of tacilltles. for familiarization with assigned

26. Communications systems operation, 77. Response to hostage situations. weapons(s). The results of weapons quallfi.

fixed site. 78. Site specific armed tactical procedures cation and requallf ication shall bc docu-

27. Access control systems and operation and operation. mcntcd by the licensee or his agent.

for individuals, packages. nnd vehicles. 79. Security response to emergency situa. A. Handgun-Guards, armed escorts and

28. Contraband detection systems and tions other than security incidents. armed response personnel shall qualify v:I(h techniques. 80. Basic transportation .dctcnslve re- ,a revolver or sdmlautomatic pistol firing the

29. Barriers and other'elay systems sponse tactics. national police course. or an equivalent nn.

around material access or vital areas. 81. Armed escort dcploymcnt. ttonnlly recognized course. Qualifying score

30. Fxtcrior and interior alarm systcnls 82. Armed escort adversary engagement. shall be ari accumulated Lotnl of 'l0 llcrcent operation. ~ 83. Armed escort formations. of the maximum obtainable score.

31. Duress alarm operation. 84. Armed escort use of weapons fire (tac- B. Scmtautomatic Rifle-Guards. armed

32. Alarm stations operation. t!cat and combat). escorts and armed response pcrsollnel. as-

33. Response force organization. 85. Armed escort and shipment movement signed to use thc semiautomatic rifle by the

34. Response force mission under fire. Ilccnsee training and qualifications plan,

35. Response force operation. 86. Tactical convoying techniques and op. shall qualify with a scmLautomatlc rifle by

30. Response force cngngcmcnt. crations. firing thc 100-yard course of fire specified in

37. Security command nnd control system 87, Armed escort tactical excrcLses.

section 17.5(1) ot thc National Rifle Associ.

'uring nornnt operation. 88. Armed escort response to bomb nnd

, nLlon, High Power Itltlc Rules book (effcc.

at tack threats. tive March 15, 1970).'r a nationally rccog.

38. Security comnland nnd control system during contingency operation. 89. Verification of shipment documcnta.

35. Transportation systenlS seCurity orgn. tion and contents. 'Copies of the "NRA High Power Rifle nizatlon nnd operation. 90. Continuous surveillance of shtpmcnt Rules" may be examined at, or obtained

40. Types of SNM trnnsporC vehicles. vehicle. from, thc National Rifle Association, 1600

41. 'I'ypcs of SNM cscorL vehicles. 91. Normal and contingency operation for Rhode Island Avenue NXV., Washington.

42. Modes of trnnsportnLion for SNM. shtpmenL mode transfer. D.C. 20036.

TEDERAL REGISTER/ VOL 43 NO I54 llVEDNESDAYi AUGUST 23'978

RULES AND REGULATIOtlS 3V429 n7zed equivalent course o! fire. Targets used (3) 12 rounds each per shotgun (00 gauge (e) Baton.

shall be as stated In section 17.5 for the 100., and slur). (f) Ammunition/equipment belt.

yard course. Time limits for Individuals (b) Ammunition available on site-two (2) (g) Pager/duress alarms.

shall be as speci(led In section 8.2 of thc times the amount stated In (a) above for 7. Binoculars.

NRA rulc book, regardless of the course each weapon. 8. Night vision aids, I.e.," hand fired llluml.

fired. Qualifying score shall bc an accurnu- 5. Personal equipment to be readily availa- nation flares or equivalent.

lated total of 80 percent of the maximum ble for Individuals whose assigned contin. 9. Tear gas or other nonlethal gas.

obtainable score. gency security job duties. as described In the Effective date: October 23, 1978.

C. Shotgun-Guards. armed escorts. and licensee physical security and contingency armed response personnel assigned to use plans, warrant such equipment: (Sec. 161I, Pub. 1 83-703, 68 Stat. 948. Pub.

the 12 gauge shotgun by the licensee train. (a) Helmet, combat. L 93-377, 88 Stat. 475: Sec. 201 Pub.

~ L 93-Ing and qualifications plan shall qualify (b) Gas mask, full face. ~ 438, 88 Stat. 1242-1243. Pub. L 94-79. 89 with a full choke or improved modified (c) Body armor (bullet.resistant vest). Stat. 413 (42 US.C. 2201, 5841).)

choke 12 gauge shotgun firing the following (d) Flashlights and batteries.

(e) Baton. Dated at Washington, D.C., this course: 16th day of August 1978.

(f) Handcuffs.

Range Posiuon No. (g) Ai(lmunltlon/equipment belt. For the Nuclear Regulatory Com-Rounds'arsct'5

6. Binocula.. mission.

7. Night vision aids, I.e., hand fired llluml.

yds.. Hip Cire nation flares or equivalent. SAMUEL J. CHILK, point.

ZS yds. Shoulder .. 8. Tear gas or other nonlethal gas. Secrcfar)/of fhg Commission.

9. Duress alarms. [FR Doc. 78-23605 Flied 8-22-'78; 8:45 am1

~

The 4 rounds shall be fired at 4 separate iarseis

10. Two.way portable radios (handl tallde) within IO seconds usins m) gauze (9 pellet) shotgun 2 channels minimum, 1 operating and 1 shells. emergency. [6750-01]

~ As scL (orth by the National Rl(ic Association B. Transportation-Armed escorts shall (NRA) In Iis oflicial rules and rerrulanorrs. -NRA Target Manufacturers Index," December 197$ .

either be equipped with or have rcadlly available the following security equipment Titlo 16 Commor ial Practices CHAPTER To.qualify thc Individual shall be required appropriate to the Individual's assigned con.

~

tlngency security related tasks or Job duties, 1 FED RAL TRADE to place 50 percent of all pellets (36 pellets) as described in the licensee physical security COMMIS ON within the black silhouette. and contingency plans:

D. Rcquallflcatlon-Individuals shall bc 1. Semiautomatic rifles with the following

[Docket 8 20]

weapons requalified at least every 12 nominal minimum specifications:

months In accordance with the NRC ap-proved liccnsec training and qualifications (a) .223 caliber. PART 13 PROHI BITE TRADE PRAC-(b) Muzzle velocity, 1.980 ft/sec. AND AfFI TIVE CORREC-plan, and In accordance with the require- (c) Muzzle energy, 955 Coot pounds.

TICES, ments stated In A, B, and C of this section. (d) Magazine or clip of 10 rounds. TIVE ACTIONS V. Guard, armed response personnel, and (e) Reload capability10 seconds.

armed escort equipment. (f) Operable In any environment ln which Rotaii Cr t Co.

A. Fixed Site-Fixed site guards and It will be used.

armed response personnel shall either be 2. 12 gauge shotguns.

AGENCY: Federal Tr de Commission.

equipped with or hate available thc follow- (a) 4 round pump or semiautomatic. ACTION: Final order.

Ing security equipment appropriate to the (b) Operable In any environment In which Individual's assigned contingency security It will be used.

SUMMARY

'This or r, among other rclatcd tasks or job duties as described In (c) Full or modified choke. things, reqtiires an At nta, Ga. collec-thc licenscc physical security and contin. 3..Semiautomatic phtols or revolvers with tor and seilcr of cons er credit Irrfor-gency plans: the following nominal minimum spec!flea. mation to divest I elf completely.

1. Semiautomatic bemused. rifles with following Lions: within I year, of the redit Bureau of

.nominal mlnlmum specifications: (a) .354 caliber. Saiein, Oreg. (CB Wes Coast), and the (a) .223 caliber. (b) Muzzle energy, 250 foot-pounds. Credit Bureau of W hington, D.C.,

(b) Muzzle velocity, 1980 ft/sec. (c) Full magazine or cylinder reload capa- subject to Commissio ) approval; and (c) Mruzie energy, 955 foot pounds. bility s 6 seconds. provide purchaser, f 3 years, with.

(d) Magazine or clip load of 10 rounds. (d) Muzzle velocity, 850 ft/sec. copies of its current files in a form (c) Magazine reload, 0 10 seconds. (e) Full cylinder or magazine capacity, 6 that will permit acq to prepare 'rer (f) operable In any environment In which rounds. and sell credit reports The order addi-It wDI (f) Operable ln any environment In which tionally bars the fi ; for 10 years,

2. 12 gauge shotguns with the following it will be used.

capabilities: from entering into nagement con-

4. Ammunition for each shipment. tracts with divested c rporations. and (a) 4 round pump or semiautomatic. (a) For each assigned weapon as appropri-(b) Operable In any environment In which ate to thc Individual's assigned contingency from acquiring, witho t prior Contmis-It will bc used.. security Job duties and as readily available sion sanction, any col ern engaged in (c) Full or modified choke. as the weapon: the business of colic ing and report-

3. Semiautomatic pistols or revolvcrs with (1) 36 rounds per handgun. ing consumer credit I ormation.

the following nominal minimum spec!flea. (2) 120 rounds pcr semiautomatic rifie. DATES: Complaint ucd March 9.

(fons:

(a) .354 caliber.

(3) 12 rounds each pcr shotgun (00 gauge 1973. Final order issu July 7, 1978 '

and slug).

(b) Muzzle energy. 250 foot-pounds. 5. Escort vehicles, bullet resisting, FOR FURTHER FORMATION (c) Full magazine or cylinder reload capa- equipped with communications systems, rcd CONTACl".

bility 0 6 seconds. flares, first aid kit, emcrgcncy tool kit, Lire Alfred F. Dougher , Jr., Director, (d) Muzzle velocity, 850 ft/sec. changing equipment, battery chargcrs, for (c) Full cylinder or magazine capacity, 6 radios (where appropriate, for rccharglng Bureau of Com tition, Federal rourlds. portable radio battcrlcs). Trade Commission, 6th Stteet and (f) Operable In any environment In which 6. Personal cqulpmcnt to be readily avalla. Pennsylvania Avenu NW. Wosbing- ~

It will be used. ble for Individuals whose assigned cont(n. ton, D.C. 20580, 202 23-3601.

4. Ammunition: gcncy security Job duties, as described ln thc SUPPLEMENTARY I ORMATION:

(a) For each assigned weapon as appropri ~ licensee physical security and contingency In the matter of retai credit company, atc to thc Individual's assigned contingency plans. warrant such equipment:

security Job duties and as readily available (a) Hehnet. combat as thc weapon: (b) Gas mask, full face. 'Copies of thc complai it. Initial decision, (I) 18 rounds per handgun. (c) Body armor (bullet resistant vesL). opinion and final order I led with Lhe origl-(2) 100 rounds pcr semiautomatic rifle. (d) Flaslillghts and batteries. nal document.

FEDERAL REGISTERr VOI 4'O' 54 IYEDNESDAYe AUGUST 23'910

qqik UNITED ~ES NUCLEAR REGULARLY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 September 29, 1978 NOTE TO: Marty Malsch Marty:

McGahey saidIin his,'l,etter 'that he knew we were going to say that we did not have authority to step into this problem area; but he also went on the say that we should be concerned about the issue.

Shouldn't we leave the door open a bit for McGahey to feel free to come in and discuss the problem further with us?

Nil iam J. Dircks III,II:

gpypg+4 Pjy + SVV4 neo~ clat <>

aft+ oct

)' 0¹:t QyQIIt Y~~3

FROM: ACTION CONTROL DATES

<<J I I '1 FM 4 + l )IIV IIJ COMPL DEADLINE O4555 ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATE OF DOCUMENT INTERIM REPLY TO; PREPARE FO SIGNATURE OF:

FINAL REPLY Q CHAIRMAN FILE LOCATION P EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OTHER:

DESCRIPTION Q LETTER Q MEMO Q REPORT Q OTHER SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS E',!'iZ'7'"":."SC,id'.~'IQ~~ " (...;,;~7 I'=~ < HII V'i!V<" '.'

-g ..I fh.'>1 4 <<Mi MC l.,'<<IF k'>yg'~~Br) 4

<<J A 44igP<<<<)w 5

'a".><<lII4 4~ ~

CLASSIFIED DATA DOCUMENT/COPY NO. C LASS I F I GATI0 N NUMBER OF PAGES CATEGORY POSTAL REGISTRY NO. Q NSI QRD Q FRD ASSIGNED TO:

g DATE

~g I'SSIGNED INFORMATION ROUTING LEGAL REVIEW TO: DATE Q

Q FINAL Q COPY NO LEGAL OBJECTIONS NOTIFY:

EDO ADMIN&CORRES BR EXT.

COMMENTS, NOTIFY:

EXT.

JCAE NOTIFICATION RECOMMENDED: GYES 0 NO NRC FORM 232 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS "DO NO7 RE/IfOI/E 7HIS COPY I 11-75 I PRINCIPAL CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL

J8-1353 Logging Date NRC SEC R ETAR I AT TO: CI Commissioner Date XEt Exec. Dir (Oper CI Gen. Counsel CI Cong. Liaison CI Solicitor O Public Affairs Q Secretary CI Incoming: e 0 . Griffin USS From:

TQ Subject ld C. Cook nuclear

... ~5-7 ower lant XK3 Prepare reply for sign'ature of:

CI Chairman CI Commissioner X&EDO, GC, CL, SOL, PA, SECY Date due Sept., 29 Cj Signature block omitted CI Return original of incoming with response Cj For direct reply Cl For appropriate action CI For information CI For recommendation Remarks: C s Co: D&SS OCA Co Acknowled e For the Commission:

'Send three (3) copies of reply to Secy Mail Facility NRC$ 2 ACTION SLIP

Respectfully referred to Congressional Liaison Nuclear Regulatory Com.

Please send me a copy of the reply to the attached letter.

Thanks, Robert P. Griffin U. S. Senator RPG:nf Eorm No.3

0 r ~

~

w 0 ~ v~

1 4

F l'(

t I

I h C

C7

+...'- UII TEIj PIjIlT BURHD WOHKEHS Ot HmEHIlH (UPBWH)

International HeadquarIeis: 25510 Kelly Rood, Roseville, Michigan 48066 k~ c~,c.

+~IS OT 1+~

JAMES C. McCAHEY FRANCIS E. FITZPATRICK I IICIIOINT ~ RCIIEYANV 71CAIUIIM TELEPHONE September 8, l978

~

(3) 3) 772-7250 l'r Dr. Clifford'V. Smith U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555

Dear Dr. Smith:

I wish to direct your attention to a developing situation at the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant in Bridgman, Michigan. The details of the problem are set forth in a letter dated August 24, l978, to the U. S.

Department of Energy, a copy of which is enclosed.

In the event that R. R. S. Security, Inc. and/or Indiana Michigan Power Company do not retain the current security force of competent and experi-enced employees, the consequences set forth in my letter to the Depart-ment of Energy will be realized. It is inconceivable that a federal regulatory agency should directly or indirectly foster, support or condone any action which is contrary to "federal policy" generally. I would like to assume that government policies in the areas of labor relations, full employment, equal rights and others are coordinated among the federal agencies.

It begs the question authority to correct for any federal agency to assert that they have no a pending problem and/or to refer that problem to another agency. Whether or not a federal agency has specific statutory authority or jurisdiction in a given area, it is nonetheless in a institute remedial action by the sheer application of "federal policy".

position'o The time has come, and the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant illustrates the problem, for the federal government to be both concerned and involved where private companies contravene various federal policies while operating under federal control and approval.

Unchecked bidding on federally regulated projects has numerous adverse consequences. First, there is unnecessary cost to the taxpayer in terms of new security clearances, recruitment and training of employees, unem-ployment and welfare costs, and overall financial loss to a community in tax and consumer dollars. Second, there is peril to the security of a facility in that continuity of operations is broken and former employees who have an intimate knowledge of the facility tend to remain in the community. Third, the situation is productive of labor unrest contrary to the mandate of the National Labor Relations Act to promote and preserve industrial stability. And, finally, the loss and hardship suffered by employees and their families is incalculable.

~ ~ ~ o /

r

~ C. ~ v = ~

~g

( ~

~

, Dr.~ Clifford V. Smith (NRC) Page 9-8-78 The problem I have described is not limited to 'the Cook Nuclear Plant at Bridgman, Michigan. It is mushrooming throughout the Country. Security guards who have given many years of dedicated and competent service to a federally owned and/or privately owned but federally regulated facility are suddenly advised that their employment is terminated. They neither influence nor control that decision and are powerless to reverse it. They are simply victims of a bidding system which various federal agencies have "failed to regulate in the best interest of a security performance, employee job security and taxpayer welfare. Only the contractor and sub-contractor benefit by system which abrogates collective bargaining agreements and employee job 'security, and perpetuates sub-standard wages and benefits.

It is no wonder that guard agency operations are marked by high employee turnover and reduced security performance. Yet when employees through collective action raise their wages', benefits, and job security to a decent level, the principal contractor relets the bid to an unorganized guard agency.

Unfortunately, the Service Contract Act and other legislation is not adequate to correct the situation. There is both a compelling need for specific legislation and, most particularly, for a new attitude and means of communication and cooperation among federal regulatory agencies. For many years our Union had similar problems at NASA facilities throughout the Country. In large measure these problems were solved by the Service Contract Act and the cooperation of NASA administrators. Such a program and attitude is now urgently needed at both federally owned and privately owned, but federally regulated, nuclear power plants. The future of one hundred security guards and their families and the fortunes of a small community in Western Michigan are at stake in this matter. The situation demands corrective action which can be of future application to emerging situations at nuclear plants throughout the Country.

On behalf of the International Union (UPGWA), and its members throughOut S

the Country, I urgently request that you give this matter your immediate attention. It is imperative that every concerned legislator and agency official coordinate their efforts and become involved to the extent possible to correct the ever recurring problem that has now arisen at the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant.

Very truly yours, S C. Mc HEY, Pr student nternational Union UPGWA JCM/gf opeiu42 Encl.

President Jimmy Carter

'c:

Secretary of Labor, F. Ray Marshall Senator Harrison A. Williams Congressman Frank Thompson, Jr.

Stuart Broad, Department of Energy SEG- IR rTACh'~p t iS t ot- HL7DITZod+L-

I

~)

IC J

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIALSAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS

'=-'...,..'='ll TED PLHllT GUHHD WORHEHS Of HmEH GH (UPGWH)

International Headquarters: 25510 Kelly Road, Roseville, Michigan 48066

+0 %> A>C e~s 0F JAMES C. McGAHEY FRANCIS E. FITZPATRICK PR 44 I OCNT 44CRCTART TRCA4URKR is~'ELEPHONE September 8, l978

~

(313) 772-7250 lT Dr. Clifford V. Smith .

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555

Dear Dr. Smith:

I wish to direct your attention to a dev'eloping situation at the C. Cook Nuclear Plant inBridgman, Mich';gan. The details of the 'onald problem are set.'orth in a letter dated August 24, l978, to the U. S.

Department of Energy, a copy of whi'ch 'is enclosed.

In the event that R. R. S. Sec'urity., Inc. and/or Indiana Michigan Power Company do not retain the'urrent security force of competent and experi-enced employees, the 'consequences'et forth 'in my letter'o the 'Depart-ment, of Energy will be'ea'lized. It 'is inconcei'vable 'that a federal regulatory agency should directly or indirectly foster, support, or condone any action whi'ch 'is contrary to "federal policy" gen'er'ally. I would like to assume that, government policies'n the 'areas of labor relations, full employmen't, equal rights and others are coordinated among the federal agencies.

It begs the question for any federal agency to assert that they have no authority to cor t a pending probl'em and/or to refer that problem to another agency. Whether'r not a federal agency has specific statutory authority or jurz.s iction in a given area, it is nonetheless in a position to institute remedial action by'heshh'er'pplication of "federal has come, and the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant illustrates the policy".'he'ime problem,,for'the 'federal government to Pe both 'cpncer'ned and involved where private, companies contravene 'various 'feder'al policies whi'le operating under federal control and approval.

Unchecked bidding on federally regulated projects has numerous adverse consequences. First, ther'e 'is unnec'es'sary cost to the 'taxpayer in terms of new security clea'rances', recruitment and training of employees, unem-ployment and wel'fare costs, and overall financial loss to a community in tax and consumer dollars.'econd, there 'is peril to the security of a facility in that. continuity of operations is broken'nd former'mployees who have an intimate kn'owledge of the facility tend to remain in the community. Thi'rd, the situation is productive of labor unrest contrary to the mandate of the National Labor Rel'ations Act to promote and preserve industrial stability. And, finally, the 'loss and hardship suffered by employees and their families is incalculable.

~ ~ ~ o/

~

~ ~

~ 4 4 4

g J

4

")

V k t e f

I ~

~

~

P '

e 0 h

Dr. Clifford V. Smith (NRC) Page -2; l

9-8-7g The problem I have desciibed is not limited to the Cook Nuclear Plant at Bridgman, Michigan. It is mushr'ooming thr'oughout the Country. Security guards who have given many years of dedicated and competent service to a federally owned and/or privately owned.but federally regulated facility are suddenly advised that their employment is terminated. They neither influence nor control that decision and are powerless to reverse it. They

'are simply victims of a bidding system wh'ich various federal agencies have failed to regulate in the best interest of,a security performance, employee job security and taxpayer welfare. Only the contractor and sub-contractor benefit by system whi'ch abrogates'ollec'tive bargaining agreements and employee job security, and perpetuates sub-standard wages and benefits.

It is no wonder 'that guard agency operations are marked by high employee turnover and reduced. security performance. Yet when employees through collective action raise their wages, benefits, and job security to a decent level, the principal contractor relets the bid to an unorganized guard agency.

Unfortunately, the Service Contract Act and other legislation is not adequate to correct, the 'situation. Ther'e is both 'a compelling need for specific legislation and, most particularly, for a new, attitude and means of communication and cooperation among federal regulatory agencies. For many years our Union'ad similar problems at NASA facilities throughout the Country. 'In large measure these problems were solved by the Service Contract Act and the cooperation of NASA administrators. Such a program and attitude is now urgently needed at both 'federally owned and privately owned, but federally regulated, nuclear power plants. The future of one hundred security guards and their families and the fortunes of a small community in Western Michigan are at stake in this matter. The situation demands corrective action which can be of future application to emerging situations at nuclear plants throughout the Country.

On behalf of the International Union (UPGWA), and its .members through5ut the Country, I urgently recjuest that you give this matter your immediate attention. It is imperative that every concerned legislator and agency official coordinate their efforts and become involved to the extent possible to correct the ever recurring problem that has 'now arisen at the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant.

Very truly yours, S C. Mc HEY, Pr student nternational Union UPGWA JCM/gf opeiu42 Encl.

cc: President Jimmy Carter Secretary of Labor,'. Ray Marshall Senator Harrison A. Williams Congressman Frank Thompson, Jr.

Stuart Broad, Department of Ener'gy

~

~ ~

I' I

I

~gtt Uf/Pg~

4ROANICR4 Ull TED PLHElT GUHRD WOHIItHS Of Hmffl GH (UPGWH)

Qo RSQ OF O OR ~ O~

25510 Kelly Road, Roseville, Michigan 48066 0 International Headquarters:

+0 +I> MI4

+~Is pr %4~

JAMES C. McGAHEY FRANCIS E. FITZPATRICK I RCSIOCRT SCCRCTART TRCASURCR TELEPHONE

~

(313) 772-7250 l7 August 24, l978 Mr. Stewart Broad, Director Office of Contractor's Industrial Relations U. S. Department of Energy Mail Station Al-4025 washington, D. C. 20545 Dear Mr. Broads REt DONALD CD COOK NUCLEAR PLANT SRIDGMAN, MICHIGAN Sinoe the inception of the Oonald C. Cook Nuolear plant in Bridgman, Michigan, security servioes have been provided by the Naokenhut Corporation under aontraot with the Indiana Miohigan Power Company.

Xn January 1972, the Xnternational Union, United Plant Guard Workers of America (UPGWA) was certified as the exclusive bargaining representative of all guards and security officers. Our Union has entered into successive collective bax'gaining agreements with Nackenhut, the last of which will not expixo until Hay 18, 1979.

Recently, the Xndiana Michigan Power Company let bids for security services.

It is significant to note that the bid was let approximately six weeks after the UP%% had negotiated increased wages and benefits for security oHVXcers under a wage reopenex. The bid was awarded to R.R.S., Xncorpoxated of South Send> Indiana, a non-union guard agency.

for R.R.S. to take-over security services from Hackenhut.

'o date has been set On August 23, 1978, I sent a certified lettex to R.R.S. requesting that it retain the seourity fox'ce and honor the existent collective bargaining agreement. A oopy of that lettex's enclosed.

X am writing to enlist your support in preventing a situation at Donald C.Cook which aould be detrimental to employees and their families, contrary -to federal labor policy, inconsistent with nuclectr power plant security, and costly to the taxpayer. What rules, rogulahions and policies does the Department of Energy have to regulate the transfer of subaontracts and to prevent the unfair and discriminatory dislocation of employees7 It must effioiently be pxesumed that individual employees of Mackenhut have perfonnad and well. Otherwise they would have been sub)ected to px'ior discharge or discipline. Thus the entployoes should not be pawns in a contracting game over which they have no voice or control.

~ ~ ~ ~ I/

~ ~

~ ~

~ ~ ~

~p g

f

, hlr. Stewart Broad Page .

U.S. Department of Energy 8/24/78 Should R.R.S. attempt to avoid its obligation to incumbent employees and their chosen bargaining representative, several adverse results will occur as follows:

l. The UPGWA will, of course, take appropriate action under federal labor law to protect the employees and the collec" tive bargaining agreement.

2. Displaced employees would join the swelling ranks of the unemployed and therefore increase unemployment and welfare costs.'.

Any new employees would have to be security cleared trained and otherwise processed at great and unnecessary expense to the taxpayer.

4. Displaced employees would remain in the small community of Bridgman and therefore pose an additional and unnecessary problem to site security. I understand that there is a current concern with nigh employee turnover and the threat it poses to security.

5. Xt is impossible to measure the human misery and hardship caused to incumbent employees, their families, and the community.

This is an urgent. problem which I trust will receive the immediate atten-tion of the Department of Energy. Xt is inconceivable that the U. S.

Government would stand idly by while federal policy is violated at a federally regulated nuclear site. By "federal policy" I have reference to full employment, saving costs, encouraging stability in labor relations, preventing age, sex, race and handicap discrimination, and a host of otQers.'he problem at Donald C. Cook epitomizes the often adverse consequences of unregulated bidding for federal services.

Nay I please hear from you immediately.

Sincerely yours, JAMES C. McGAHEY, President International Union U.P.G.N.A.

JCH/gf opeiu42 Encl.

cc: Indiana l~lichigan Power Company The ttlackenhut Corporation henry E. Applen Charles E. Lamb Gordon Gregory

1 t

~ a I'

.,'R60TIIb PdtlPTRANSMITTAL RL TO: ( me,'office symbol, room number, Initials Date, building, ilgency/Post) 1.

lon File Note and Return roval For Clearance Per Conversation Requested For Correction Prepare Reply ircuiate For Your Information See Me omm ant Investigate Signature Coordination dustl REMARKS y y" E(5'gygl

~J<<t<<~8 >i/Z ~~~ri~4-~

~~~rs ~~H i(j/~ ~

~~5'~~r~~

~pe p ep orm 4+g w P9c~iu p~/~/Ju n $

DO PVOFust3 5 RECORD of approvals, concurrences, disposals, clearances, and similar actions FROM: (Name, org. symbol c st) Room No.Bldg.

Phone No.

5041-102 OPnONAI. FORM 41 (Rev. 7-76)

Preecrlbed bv GSA

• GpoI lOTT 0 233 330 (3450) FPMR (41 CFR) 101-11.206

Date ROUTING ARD'RANSMITTAL SUP TO: (Name, oNce symbol, room number, Initials Date building, Agency/Post)

File Note and Return For Clearance Per Conversation Re uested For Correction Prepare Rep ircuiate For Your information See Me mment Investigate Signature Coordination pl-& p~~

of approvals, c ncurrences, DO NOT use this form as a RECORD disposals, clearances, and similar actions FROM: (Name, org. symbol, Agency/Post) Room No.Bldg.

Phone No.

SOll-102 OPTIONAL FORM 41 (Rev. 7-76)

Prescribed bv GSA FPMR (hl CFRI 101-11.206 4 U. S.ON:10774-241 590/2228

4 I ~

> building, Agency/Post)

1. '< //71 ///d'/

'nitials SORTING AND TRANSMITTAL SUP

~,~TO: (Name, oflice symbol, room number Date on File Note and Return roval For Clearance Per Conversation Re uested For Correction Prepare Re ircuiate For Your Information See Me mment investigate Sgnature Coordination Justl

+~~ JiZ y ~c~Z<~g

,~/~He, q~8 DO NOT use this form as a RECORD of approvals, concurrences, dlsposals, clearances, and similar actions FROM: N e, org. sym I, ency/Post) . Roe~ No Bldg.

$8 Phone o.

g 72-5041-102 OPTiONAL FORM 41 (Rev. 7-76) 0 U.S" G.P.O. 1977-241-530/3090 Prescribed by GSA FPMR (41 CFR) 101<<11~

~

4'NFMO ROUTE SLIP See me about this. For concurronc For action Form ERDh-93 (1-75) ERDhM 0240 Note and return. For sfanature. For Inlormatlon.

.$0 (Nemo and unit) IHITIALS RESIARKS "Dr. Clifford V. Smit Director, Ofc. of Nuclear Materials Safety 8 Safeguard , NRC TO (Nemo and unit) IRITIALS TO (Name and unit) IKITIALS FRO Namean o,

I RENARKS tuar Ds I am forwardin the attached since your office might have an Ofc. of Contractor . interest in the security aspects of this complaint.

Industrial Relatio DOE

Attachment:

PHONE HO.. DATE Ltr to,Broad fm McGahey, UPGMA, dt 8 8, w nc 353-5084 8/30/78 USE OTHER SIDE FOR ADDITIONAL RES)ARKS AAU ~ 6. 6 ~ P ~ 0 ~ I 977 7E6 666174E

~ V i

i~

4

~ ~

r Department of Energy Washington, D.C. 20545 g,UG go 3978 Mr. James C. McGahey, President United Plant Guard Workers of America (UPGWA) 25510 Kelly Road Roseville, Michigan 48066

Dear Mr. McGahey:

I am responding to your letter of August 24, 1978, regarding certain guard union problems at the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant in Bridgman, Michigan. Regretably, this office is unable to respond to your request since the Department of Energy does not have industrial relations responsibility at commercial nuclear power plants. I note, however, that you have indicated concerns regarding security at this plant.

Accordingly, I have forwarded your letter to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). I am sure that NRC will review the security concerns outlined in your letter.

Sincerely, gg( Stuart 8~~4 Stuart Broad Director, Offi ce o f Contractor ndustrial Relations

'c: Dr. Clifford Y. Smith, NRC

' ~

~I,PN llgi)f~

ORDANIZRa UR TED PLHRT GUHRD WOHHEHS Of HNEH CH (UPGWH) o 1$ 4$

$ e~

international Headquarters: 25510 Kelly Road, Roseville, Michigan 48066 d oli MID c~

+fItg PP gL~+

JAMES C, McGAHEY FRANC(S E. FIT?PATRtCK PRESIDENT SCCRCTARY TRCARURCR TELEPHONE (313) 772-7250

~IT August 24, 1978 Mr. Stewart Broad, Director Office of Contractor's Industrial Relations U. S. Department of Energy Mail Station Al-4025 Washington, D. C. 20545

Dear Mr. Broad:

RE: DONALD C. COOK NUCLEAR PLANT BRIDGMAN, MICHIGAN Since the inception of the Donald C. Cook Nuclear plant in Bridgman, Michigan, security services have been provided by the Wackenhut. Corporation under contract with the Indiana Michigan Power Company.

In January 1972, the International Union, United Plant Guard Workers of America {UPGWA) was certified as the exclusive bargaining representative of all-guards and security officers. Our Union has entered into successive collective bargaining agreements with Wackenhut, the last. of which 'will not expire until May 18, 1979.

Recently, the Indiana Michigan Power Company let bids for security services.

It is significant to note that the bid was let approximately six weeks after the 'UPGWA had negotiated increa'sed wages and benefits for security officers under a wage reopener. The bid was awarded to R.R.S., Incorporated of South Bend, Indiana, a non-union guard agency. No date has been set for R.R.S. to take-over security services from Wackenhut.

August 23, 1978, I sent a certified letter to R.R.S. requesting that it On retain agreement.

the security force and honor the existent collective bargaining A copy of that letter is enclosed.

I am writing to enlist your support in preventing a situation at Donald C.Cook which 'could be detrimental to employees and their families,-

contrary to federal labor policy, inconsistent with 'nuclear power plant security, and costly to the taxpayer. What rules, regulations and policies does the Department of Energy have to regulate the'ransfer of subcontracts and to prevent the unfair and discriminatory dislocation of employees?

It must efficiently be presumed that individual employees of Wackenhut have. per'formed and well. Othe'rwise 'they would have been subjected to prior discharge or discipline. Thus the employees should not be pawns in a contracting game over which they have no voice or control.

6129

~ ~ ~ ~ o/

Mr. Stewart Broad Page '-2-.

U.S. Department of Energy 8/24/78-Sho'uld R.R.S. attempt to avoid its obligation to incunbent employee's and their chosen bargaining representative, several adverse results will occur as follows:.

1. The UPGNA will, of course, take appropriate action under federal labor law to protect, the employees'nd the'ollec-tive bargaining agreement.

costs' 2.. Displaced employees would join the swelling ranks of the .

unemployed and therefore 'increase 'unemployment and wel'fare Any new .employees would have 'to be 'security cleared trained and otherwise proces'sed at.'great and unn'eces'sary expen'se 'to the taxpayer.

4. Displaced employees would remain in the small community of Bridgman'and therefore "pose-'an additional and unnec'essary problem to site 'security. I under'stand that there 'is a current concern with 'high employee 'turnover and the threat it poses'o sec'urity.

S. It is- impossible to mea'sure the human misery and hardship caused to incumbent employees,'heir families', and the community.

This is an urgent problem which .I 'trust will.receive the'mmediate 'atten-tion of the Department, of Energy.. It is inconceivable is that, the violated

'U.

at S.

Government would stand idly by while federal policy a federally regulated nuclear site. By "federal policy" I have 'referen'ce to full employment, saving costs,* encouraging stability in labor rel'ations,.

preventing age, sex,'ace 'and nandicap disciimination, and a heist of others. The problem at Donald C. Cook epitomizes theoften adverse consequences of unregulated bidding for federal ser'vices.'ay I please hea'r from you immediatel'y.

Si:ncerely yours, KS C. NcGAHEY,, Pr sident nternational Union'.PE G.N A.

JCM/gf opeiu42 .

Encl.

cc: Indiana Michi:gan Power Company The Elackenhut Corporation Henry E.

E. Lamb Applen'harles Gordon Gregory

r (1

'I

~

4

( ~

+

)

bo 4 Q. g P)j 7%

II IIN c

OFOANCED PS%.1'7 p UR TtD PLHRT BUHHD WOHtIfHS Of HIMCH (UPBWH) 114 ~

0 04 C7 0 'nternational KeodquorIers: 25510 Kelly Road, Roseville, Michigan 48066 Og '> M~ gC~a

+~Is or la~

JAMES C. McGAHEY CERTIFIED MAIL FRANCIS E. FITZPATRICK IIACOIDCNZ RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED IKCIIKTAIIYTACAIUAKII FELEPHON6 (313) 772-7250 August 23, 1978

~<v Mr. Donald Quad, Area Manager R.R.S., Incorporated 403 Dixie Way North South Bend, Indiana 46637

Dear Mr. Quad:

lt has been brought to the attention of this International Union that your Company is the successful bidder to provide security services at the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Power Site in Bridgman, Michigan. This International, and its Amalgamated Local No. 37, has been the exclusive bargaining agent for all Patrolmen and Sergeants at that site since 1972. Currently, there is a Labor Agreement in effect between the Wackenhut Corporation and the International Union, United Plant Guard Workers of America (UPGWA) and its Amalgamated Local No. 37. That Agreement expires at 0700 hours0.0081 days <br />0.194 hours <br />0.00116 weeks <br />2.6635e-4 months <br /> on May 1S, 1979.

Please accept this letter as our request for a meeting with your Company for the purpose of working out a smooth transition where-in your Company accepts the employees and the Contract now in effect. The Union is willing to make modifications such as the change in the Company's name and in other areas to your Company.

if not-applicable We request your immediate reply because we feel that this transi-tion is of a serious nature; and resolved as early as possible.

it is important that we get it Very truly yours, J AME C . McGAHEY President International Union U.P.G.W.A.

JCM/esb opeiu42 cc: James Six, R.R.S., Inc.

William Stewart, President, Local 37 UPGWA Charles E. Lamb, Director, Region 2 UPGWA

0 4 hC

.r

~ t

/

)ffzp~~~o< D Q Se tember 15 ~ J9 78 Respectfully referred to Congressional Liaison Nuclear Regulatory Com..

Please send me a copy of the reply to the attached letter.

Thanks, Robert P. Griffin U. S. Senator RPG:nf FOtZZ1 ilOo 3

f " i')I Irrrjff Pg UllTE LflllT BUflHD NOHHE Ot flftlEHGfl CUPBNH) ass 1V 1 Std f~

p C7 lntornarional Headciuorrvra: 25510 lc:ally Road, Roseville, Michigan 48065

~P les OF FRANCIS E. FITZPATRICK JAMES C. McGAHEY ICCIIC'rANV.VIICAIVIISA I'IICIIOINr T E i. E F'.O NE September 8, 1978

~

(313) 772-7250 l7 cr.g goc~gza Dr. Clifford'. Smith U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nashington, D. C. 20555 o~y$ 0~0

Dear Dr. Smith:

4$

I wish to direct your attention to a developing situation at the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant in Bridgman, Michigan. The details of the

~

problem are set forth in a letter dated August 24, 1978, to the U. S.

Department of Energy, a copy of which is enclosed.

In the event that R. R. S. Security, Inc. and/or Indiana Michigan Power Company do not, retain the current security force of competent and experi-enced employees, the consequences set forth in my letter to the Depart-ment of Energy will be realized. Xt is inconceivable that a federal regulatory agency should directly or indirectly foster, support or condone any action which is contrary to "federal policy" generally. I would like to assume that government policies in the areas of labor relations, full employment, equal rights and others are coordinated among the federal agencies.

It begs the question for any federal agency to assert that they have no authority to correct a pending problem and/or to refer that problem to another agency. whether or not a federal agency has specific statutory authority or jurisdiction in a given area, it to institute remedial action by the sheer application of "federal policy".

is nonetheless in a position The time has come, and the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant illustrates the problem, for the federal government to be both concerned and involved where private companies contravene various federal policies while operatin under federal control and approval.

Unchecked bidding on federally regulated projects has numerous adverse consequences. First, there is unnecessary cost to the taxpayer in terms of new security clearances, recruitment and training of employees, unem-ployment and welfare costs, and overall financial loss to a community in tax and consumer dollars. Second, there is peril to the security of a facility in that continuity of operations is broken and former employees who have an intimate knowledge of the facility tend to remain in the community. Third, the situation is productive of labor unrest contrary to the mandate of the National Labor Relations Act to promote and preserv industrial stability. And, finally, the loss and hardship suffered by employees and their families is incalculable.

Dr. Clifford V. Smith NRC) Page 9-&-7&

The problem I have described is not limited to the Cook Nuclear Plant at Bridgman, Michigan. It is mushrooming throughout the Country. Security guards who have given many years of dedicated and competent service to a federally owned and/or privately owned but federally regulated facility are suddenly advised that their employment is terminated. They neither influence nor control that decision and are powerless to reverse it. They are simply victims of a bidding system which various federal agencies have "failed to regulate in the best interest of a security performance, employee job security and taxpayer welfare. Only the contractor and sub-contractor benefit by system which abrogates collective bargaining agreements and empl,oyee job 'security, and perpetuates sub-standard wages and benefits.

It is no wonder that guard agency operations are marked by high employee turnover and reduced security performance. Yet when employees through collective action raise their wages, benefits, and job security to a decent level, the principal contractor relets the bid to an unorganized guard agency.

Unfortunately, the Service Contract Act and other legislation is not adequate to correct the situation. There is both a compelling need for specific legislation and, most particularly, for a new attitude and means of communication and cooperation among federal regulatory agencies.

years our Union had similar problems at NASA facilities throughout Fox'any the Country. In large measure these problems were solved by the Service Contract Act and the cooperation of NASA administrators. Such a program and attitude is now urgently needed at both federally owned and privately owned, but federally regulated, nuclear power plants. The future of one hundred security guaxds and their families and the fortunes of a small community in Western Michigan are at stake in this matter. The situation demands corrective action which can be of future application to emerging situations at nuclear plants throughout the Country.

On behalf of the International Union (UPGWA), and its members throughdut the Country, I urgently request that you give this matter your immediate attention. It is imperative that every" concerned legislator and agency official coordinate their efforts and become involvedhasto now the extent arisen at possible to correct the ever recurring problem that the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant.

Very truly yours, S C. Mc HEY, Pr student ntexnational Union UPGWA JCM/gf opeiu42 Encl.

cc: President Jimmy Carter Secretary of Labor, F. Ray Marshall Senator Harrison A. Williams Congressman Frank Thompson, Jr.

Stuart Broad, Department of Energy SEE- RT~ae Hap L is( gt- ]qgg)yTyada(- ~o (+ ~+ >*

June 14, 1976 The Honorable Edward Hutchinson United States House of Representatives Washington, D. C. 20515

Dear Congressman Hutchinson:

This is in response to your letter of May 21, 1976 to the NRC Office of Congressional Affairs requesting a reply to various concerns of your constituent, Miss Mitzi Johnston.

Miss Johnston raises several questions related to the safe operation of nuclear power plants, and these will be discussed below. Some of her questions are, as you know, addressed directly to you, and we will try to provide some background on the subjects involved, where appropriate.

Though it is not Miss Johnston's first question, it seems best to begin by identifying NRC. The Nuclear Regulatory Conmission came into being by enactment of-the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 and began official operation on January 19, 1975. Prior to that time, the Atomic Energy Commission was responsible for both developmental and regulatory activities associated with nuclear energy, including power plants, under the-Atomic Energy Act of 1954. The AEC was dissolved by the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 which placed its regulatory functions under the NRC and its developmental functions under the Energy Research and Development Administration. The NRC is also governed by provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. As set forth in these statutes, the primary mission of the NRC is to assure that civilian nuclear activities are conducted in a manner which will protect-public health and safety, national security and environmental quality. This is done through a system of licensing and regulation which involves standards setting, safety reviews and studies, inspection of licensed operation and enforcement of NRC rules, and confirmatory research to verify the adequacy of regulations and reveal any need to augment, replace or improve them.

I am enclosing for Miss Johnston's information a copy of NRC's 1975 Annual Report which contains a comprehensive presentation of this agency's functions and current activities in regulating nuclear energy uses,.including nuclear power plants, on behalf of the public..

OFFICE~

SURNAME~

DATA ~

POna hEC.318 (RST. 9.$ 3) AECM 0240 0 U, 1, OOVERHMENT RRINTIHO 01PIPICEI IOTA S21 I 11

4~ "7 ~ I r '4 I 44

~ '

4 4, gsgsl'I v

4 Cf 4

1 ICP 'I

(

7 Il4 ~ 4' 1(

c

'CIPE 4

tl 4

4

~

Is Et f

f) [4444 fttl 1 -g 4 4 =

4 I \444 447 v I I' ' 4 4 I'

Cll I I '4 E

4

-4 4 I fs I 1 4 7 4 ~,I I tll Eg g 4

4

• 4 7 ~

O'E E ~

~7 I

4 ~ ~

~ IP 'I st ~

4 ~

• ~ Cv.

-4 'I ~ 44 14

~ '

4 l

PW 4 4

IPI I I' Cf p

4 ~ 1 4 r I 4

t 4 I C I' 4'l4

'I

'I 4 Il 44 . 4 I

4 4 <<7 4

~=

Iff v ~

4 - I I IC 4 I gvt ~f' I

4'

~

I 7 7

'4 r.>>

4

The Konorable Edward Kutchinson The particular incident to which tliss Johnston refers was a minor event that occurred at the Donald C. Cook nuclear facility in Berrien County, Michigan. The facility consists of two separate reactor units, one in operation and the other under construction. On thy 10, 1976.

a slight increase abovevt;he very low level of radioactivity normally present in the air was detected in the auxiliary building for the facility. 'his building is separate from the reactor containment buildings and houses such apparatus as water-treatment systems, electrical systems, and the "Emergency Core Cooling System" (a back-up system to supply cooling water in the event of loss of the normal reactor coolant). The cause of the rise in radioactivity was leakage from a valve which had not been completely closed following a scheduled shutdown of the reactor for routine inspection and maintenance. The officials at the, plant thought to evacuate the auxiliary building at once, due to tlie increase in the it prudent level of airborne radioactivity. Construction workers fn the reactor building under construction heard the public-address announcement intended to apply only to those in the auxiliary building. The workers evacuated the reactor building, some of them leaving the gob site entirely. It was that action, apparently. that attracted media attention and led to the newspaper item cited by Miss Johnston.

Plant personnel were able to enter the auxiliary building right away, with protective clothing, and the situation was resolved in a matter of a few hours. No personnel exposure in excess of regulatory limits resulted from the increase in airborne radioactivity, and no off-site release of radioactivity in excess of regulatory limits occurred. Thus, the incident was not of the type that must be reported to the NRC. Nevertheless, because of public interest evoked by the media coverage, NRC was notified. On Hay 11, the next day, an- NRC inspector and an 5RC radiation protection specialist visited the auxiliary building and confirmed that conditions were normal and that there had been no danger to the public.

Plant officials have taken steps to assure that all valves will be secured and checked after maintenance and to improve communication with the construction crews at work on the new unit.

Your constituent asks what is to prevent an occurrence of greater consequence, if these kinds of incidents are allowed to occur. It is

-an understandable and valid question, of course, though I would point out again that %his particular occurrence was actually of no consequence to safety and the licensee would have liked to prevent it on the basis of economic operation alone. The NRC's primary concern is protection of public health and safety against serious accidents, and a "def nse-in-depth" co cept is required and employed in the OFFICE~

4 U R HAM 4 9P'ATEN'orm ABC-518 (ReT. 9.55) hZCM 0240 Q U, 4, oovL'RHMCNT PRINTINP SPTIc2I IPTA 424 144 W w J~'a

'h a

The Honorable Edward Hutchinson - 3-design, construction and operation of each nuclear plant. This involves three successive and mutually reinforcing echelons of defense. The first emphasizes accident prevention by requiring sound and conservative design in accord with stringent quality standards and engineering practices, with a high degree of freedom from faults and errors. The second echelon of defense and this is perhaps most pe~tinent to Miss Johnston's concern -- assumes that failures or operating errors that potentially could lead to safety problems will occur during the service life of a nuclear power plant despite all the care taken to prevent them. Accordingly, NRC requires the provision of redundant safety systems to detect off-normal conditions and prevent escalation of minor incidents into major ones. The third echelon of defense supplements the first two through features that provide additional margins of safety to protect the public against unlikely accidents. Your constituent will find detailed descriptions of the NRC's safety measures concerning power reactors in Chapter 2 of the enclosed Annual Report.

Since the NRC's functions relate primarily to protection of public health and safety, national security and environmental quality, we can offer only general comment concerning Hiss Johnston's questions about the future of nuclear power and the cost of nuclear plants.

The Energy Research and Development Administration, whibII is charged with developing all promising modes of energy to meet national needs.

has identified coal and nuclear energy as the most realistic alternatives to oil among energy sources presently available and technically usable.

Nuclear energy also is prominent in recent forecasts of the Federal Energy Administration for the next two decades. Details as to the expenditure of public funds on development of nuclear plants and fore-casts for all forms of energy can be obtained from these two agencies.

Construction of nuclear power plants has, of course, required billions of dollars of investment by electric utilities. Nevertheless, their choices of generating sources have been dictated by economics, and they have indicated that high capital costs have been offset by savings in nuclear fuel costs. Nore information on factors influencing this private investment may be obtained from the Edison Electric Institute, 90 Park Avenue, New York, New York 10016.

In conclusion, I would note that the NRC neither promotes nor opposes nuclear power per se, and that we share the concern of the Congress, other Federal agencies and the vast majority of scientists and engineers Ohh ICE W SUhHAMSW DATE&

Pdrfd APA:-318 (RST.'9 55) hECM 0240 4 U. S, OOVSSHMSNT PhlNTINC OFTICSI IS74 ~ S2d 1dd

R I

'IJI I~ R I a

~

I k .>>>> V '( ~

I I R t

1 I 'I

~ k-3 IH I'I R '( ' '> 'I 1 VV - ' ' 3tH\I P

kill 'R Q)t Rk

IL I

'<<e ~ ~ - I' V ~ >

R

~ I I

R

'3 ~ f =- ~

4 << I V k

'ilk. ~ I J - V

>>. e>V

>>> I C I I V

' ~

k

"~ ~

' AR I Rg~ -I ~

~'V(li k ~ ~

k

! VE

'c

>>CI>l 4 3

~ I>>

I I e IV IR I

- ~

Ygky<<VCR C>

'R ~

hk ~ I> 1 lj ll

>'vI I k>

II

'I

-', ~,

il I k < ~

I 'I

'I 3( 4.' ev t 141 A R I~ I

-$ t,' k ~ I R H 4

~ ~ ll

~ >P "I AI I P R IR RR

• ~

I I,h f R e>>a> T QI R

'I t<<EVRI k>>"

S,'R 3 I Rl RI 1

~ ~

The Honorable Edward Hutchinson - 4-that members of the public, such as Miss Johnston, be given the most comprehensive and accurate information available as they make their judgments concerning the future of nuclear energy.

Sincerely.

Willi"rn J, Dircks esistant;:ncutivo Direcfcgf for GpeLations

Enclosure:

NRC's 1975 Annual Report DISTRIBUTION W. J, Naher, EDO:SPB l<l G. Dooly, EDO:SPB J. H. Cook, EDO:SPB EDO Reading File (00428)

E. Volgenau, IE B. Marnjck, IE CA(3)

Edward L. Jordan, IE, Region III 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 PDR Docket Files (50-315 and 50-316)

(50:315"and 50-316)

Local PDR,,' ('50-315.'an'd 50-316$

EDO:SPB ELD ~)

OP II IIN A M C 9P'DQSP PIC C 9P'

'NMaher.'..:.Pmk ...MGD............... -~..

9P'A'rc 6/7/76 6/ /76 6Pi/76 Form AEC-91$ (Rex. 9.55) hXCM 0240 4 V, 4, OOVCIINMCNC PAINTINO OPPICCI I474 424 l44

II ILLA

'a

c"gp,R AEONS UNITED STATES ai. C) CLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I (O~n tp WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 0 Q~

vi ice

+y qP

++*++

JUN 14 1976 The Honorable Edward Hutchinson United States House of Representatives Mashington, D. C. 20515 Dear'ongressman Hutchinson; This is in response to your letter of May 21, 1976 to the NRC Office of Congressional Affairs requesting a reply to various concerns of your constituent, Miss Mitzi Johnston.

Miss'ohnston raises several questions related to the safe operation of nuclear power plants, and these will be discussed below. Some of her questions are, as you know, addressed directly to you, and we will try to provide some background on the subjects involved, where appropriate.

Though it is not Miss Johnston s first question, it seems best to begin by identifying NRC. The Nuclear Regulatory COIImrission came into being by enactment of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 and began official operation on January 19, 1975. Prior to that time, the Atomic Energy Commission was responsible for both developmental and regulatory activities associated with nuclear energy, including power plants, under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. The AEC was dissolved by the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 which placed its regulatory functions unde'r the NRC and its developmental functions under, the Energy Research and Development Administration. The NRC is also governed by provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. As set forth in these statutes, the primary mission of the NRC is to assure that civilian-nuclear activities are conducted in a manner which will protect public health and safety, national security and environmental quality. This is done through a system of licensing and regulation which involves standards setting, safety reviews and studies, inspection of licensed operation and

. enforcement of NRC rules, and confirmatory research to verify the adequacy of regulations and reveal any need to augment, replace or improve them.

I am enclosing for Miss Johnston's information a copy of NRC's 1975 Annual Report which contains a comprehensive presentation of this agency's functions and current activities in regulating nuclear energy uses, including nuclear power plants, on behalf of the public.

1 \

e, The Honorable Edward Hutchinson The particular incident to which Miss'Johnston refers was a minor event that occurred at the Donald C. Cook nuclear facility in Berrien County, Michigan. The facility consists of two separate reactor units, one in operation and the other under construction. On May 10, 1976, a slight increase above the very low level of radioactivity normally present in the air was detected in the auxiliary building for the facility. This building is separate from the reactor containment buildings and houses such apparatus as water-treatment systems, electrical systems, and the "Emergency Core Cooling System" (a back-up system to supply cooling water in the event of loss of the normal reactor coolant). The cause of the rise in radioactivity was leakage from a valve which had not been reinspection completely closed following a scheduled shutdown of the reactor for routine and maintenance. The officials at the plant thought it prudent to evacuate the auxiliary building at once, due to the increase in the level of airborne radioactivity.. Construction workers in the reactor building under construction heard the public-address announcement intended to apply only to those in the auxiliary building. The workers evacuated the reactor building, some of them leaving the job site entirely. It was that action, apparently, that attracted media attention and led to.the newspaper item cited by Miss Johnston.

Plant personnel were able to enter the auxiliary building right away, with protective clothing, and the situation was resolved in a matter of a'few hours. No personnel exposure "in excess of regulatory limits resulted from the increase in airborne. radioactivity, and no off-site release of radioactivity in excess of regulatory limits occurred. Thus, the incident was not of the type that must be reported to the NRC. Nevertheless, because of public interest evoked by the media coverage, NRC was notified. On May ll, the next day, an NRC inspector and an NRC radiation protection specialist visited the auxiliary building and confirmed that conditions were normal and that there had been no danger to the public.

Plant officials have taken steps to assure that all valves will be secured and checked after maintenance and to improve communication with the construction crews at work on the new unit.

Your constituent asks what is to prevent an occurrence of greater consequence, if these kinds of incidents are allowed to occur. It is an understandable and valid question, of course, though I would point out again that this particular occurrence was actually of no consequence to safety and the licensee would have liked to prevent it on the basis of economic operation alone. The NRC's primary concern is protection of public health and safety against serious accidents, and a "defense-in-depth" concept is required and employed in the

0 The Honorable Edward Hutchinson 3 design, construction and operation of"each nuclear plant. This involves three successive and mutually reinforcing echelons of defense. The first emphasizes accident prevention by requiring sound and conservative design in accord with stringent quality standards and engineering practices, with a high degree of freedom from faults and errors. The second echelon of defense -- and this is perhaps most pertinent to Hiss Johnston's concern -- assumes that failures or operating errors that potentially could lead to safety problems will occur during the service life of a nuclear power plant despite all the care taken to prevent them. Accordingly, NRC requires the provision of redundant safety systems to detect off-normal conditions and prevent escalation of minor incidents into major ones. The third echelon of defense supplements the first two through features that provide additional margins of safety to protect the public against unlikely accidents. Your constituent will find detailed descriptions of the NRC's safety measures concerning power reactors in Chapter 2 of the enclosed Annual Report.

Since the NRC's functions relate primarily to protection of public health and safety, national security and environmental quality, we can offer only general comment concerning Hiss Johnston's questions about the future of nuclear power and the cost of nuclear plants.

The Energy Research and Development Administration, which is charged with developing all promising modes of energy to meet national needs, has identified coal and nuclear energy as the most realistic alternatives to oil among energy sources presently available and technically usable.

Nuclear energy also is prominent in recent forecasts of the Federal Energy Administration for the next two decades. Details as to the expenditure of public funds on development of nuclear plants and fore-casts for all forms of energy can be obtained from these two agencies.

Construction of nuclear power plants has, of course, required billions of dollars of investment by electric uti lities. Nevertheless, their choices of generating sources have been dictated by economics, and they have indicated that high capital costs have been offset by savings in nuclear fuel costs. More information on factors influencing this private investment may be obtained from the Edison Electric Institute, 90 Par k Avenue, New York, New York 10016.

In conclusion, I would note that the NRC neither promotes nor opposes nuclear power per se, and that we share the concern of the Congress, other Federal agencies and the vast majority of scientists and engineers

s The Honorable Edward Hutchinson - 4-4 ",',

that members of the public, such as Hiss Johnston, be given the most comprehensive and accurate information available as they make their Judgments concerning the future of nuclear energy.

Sincerety, William J Dircks Assistant ExecUtive Diredot.'or Operations

Enclosure:

NRC's 1975 Annual Report DISTRIBUTION:

R. J. N W. G.

1, Dooly, EDO:SPB EDO:SPB J. H. Cook, EDO:SPB EDO Reading File (00428)

E. Volgenau, IE B. Warnick, IE CA(3)

Edward L. Jordan, IE, Region III 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 Docket PDR

'" Files (50-315 and

'50-315 50-316) and 50-316)

Local PDR, (50-315 and 50-31(i)

EDO:SPB EDOSPB ELD EDO 4VIIHAMC W WJNahee.:.pmk...........MGDoo1y...

DATC~

6/7/76 7/j/7/ 6/ /76 6/ /76 6/ /76 Porm AEC-318 (RCT. 9 f S) hXCM 0240 4 V, 4, OOVCIIHMCHTPAIHTIHO OPPICCI I4TA 444 I44

f k

CO MMIT1EESI RANKINO MINORITY MEMOER, COMMITTEE ON THC JUDIClhRY 1

STANDARDS OF OFF ICIAI CONDUCT EDWARD AUTCHlNSON 601(gl'ESS Df ffJE SHf(Eb St6(CS RctRECENTATIYE IN CDNOR444 4TH DI4TRICT, MICNIDAN @nude nt Seyt;edentntib~s MRS< Ae O. SCHUI TZ Kasfjtrtgtott, %).C. 20515 ADMINI4TRATIVE A44IATANl'336 HOUSE OFF IC& BUILDING PHONE; (202) 225-3761 Hay 21, 1976 Congressional Liaison Office Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20555 Gentlemen:

Prompted by the reporting of a small radioactive le'ak at the Donald C. Cook nuclear energy plant at Bridgman, Hichigan, I have received the attached letter from Hiss Hitzi Johnston of Stevensville, IKchi-gan raising a number of questions about the future and safety of nuclear plants.

I would appreciate as thorough a response to the questions she has raised as you can give in a letter I may forward her in reply.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Sincerely, Encl.

~ $1 ~ ~> ~

Sj, Ij r(' I Q .).i DISTRICT OCFICESI 201 FCOCRAL DOILOIND 175 TCRRIVORIAL RO. DCNTON HARRORg MICHIGAN PIRRICs (616) 025 7462 MRS, LLOYD PHILLIPS, SCCRCTARY

'l07 FcocRAL DINLDIN0 E MAUMccANDORDADST,

~ ADRIAN~ MICNIOAN PINRICa (517) 263 1630 MRS. FAUN PLATT, SCCRCTARY

Nitzi Johnston ..., pp, 2236 Pawnee Path Stevensvil l e, NI 49127 Nay:"1'4, 1976 Honorable Edward Hutchinson House of Representatives 2336 Rayburn Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Sir:

As a concerned resident of'Michigan, I am writing to you about an issue that has recently been given a considerable amount of adverse publicity.

The issue I am referring to is that of nuclear power plant safety.

Because I am living in Stevensville, I have a particular interest in the Donald C. Cook Nuclear facility near Bridgman. An article that appeared in the "Herald-Palladium" on Tuesday, May 11th indicated there had been a small radioactive release in a part of the Cook Plant. If an incident such as this is allowed to happen, what is to prevent an occurrence of greater consequence?

Are there any organizations or federal commissions set up to monitor and safeguard against any possible nuclear accidents?. If so, do they strictly regulate the activities at nuclear plants involving safety requirements?

Do you favor stricter regulations for nuclear plants?

Do you feel the outcome of the nuclear initiative due to go before California voters on June 8th will have, any effect on other states, in particular our state of Michigan? Also, has there been any recent legislation before congress on nuclear power plants; and if so, what has your stand been?

Do you see a definite future for atomic power as compared to conventional types of power? Can you see any justification for the billions of dollars being spent on present plants and the development of future plants?

Any information you can give me on this subject would be greatly appreciated.

Sincerely yours,

.Nitzi Johnston

II 0

t'f i',

W

4 FROM: ACTION CONTROL DA ES CONTROL NOO Rey>> R8mc4 gecebQeee COMPL DEADLINE 0428 ACKNOWLEDGMENT 'ATE OF DOCUMENT INTERIM REPLY TO: PREPARE FOR SIGNATURE OF:

/

~

FINAL REP i/ Q CHAIRMAN FILE LOCATI Q EXECUTIVE, DIRECTOR OTHERl 'GLXCCQI2 DESCRIPTION LETTER .

Q MEMO Q REPORT Q OTHER SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REhhARKS EaeX 'Xte Ka 5itti Zehwatee cixyxeaafag eence r@ ceycxtM ialiocetive iaaf'4 RceeM C..

6 ~ eee~oo to q@eoCioes x'e CM eCeco 5 Safety ef 'eueRent yam jhIate CLASSIFIED DATA DOCUMENT/COPY hlO, CLASSIFICATION NUMBER OF PAGES CATEGORY POSTAL REGISTRY NO. Q NSI Q RD. Q FRD ASSIGNED TO'ATE INFORMATION ROUTING LEGAL REVIEW 0 FINAl, '

NO LEGAL OBJECTIONS COPY ASSIGNED TO) DATE NOTIF Y:

Q EDO AOMIN& CORRES BR EXT.

COMMENTS, NOTIFY:

EXT.

JCAE NOTIFICATION RECOMMENDED: Q YES 0 NO

... NRC FORM 232 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS I11 751 DO NOT RE>I/IOI/E THIS COPY PRINCIPAL CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL

COMMITTEESI RANKING MINORITY MEMBER, COMMITIEEON THE JUDICIARY STANDARDS OF OFFICIAI CONDUCT EDWARD, H UTCH INSON Co)(geess of tfje Ht(itch States RepReseIITATIYE ol CONORess 4TH DlsTRIET, MIERISAII @nude of Seyt;edentatibes MRS. A. O. SCHULT2 8faefjhrgtotf, 5,C. 20515 ADMIRISTRATIVSASSISTAlrr 2336 HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING PHONEI (202) 225 3761 May 21, 1976 Congressional Liaison Office Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20555 Gentlement Prompted by the reporting of a small radioactive leak at the Donald C. Cook nuclear energy plant at Bridgman, Michigan, I have received the attached letter from Miss Mitzi Johnston of Stevensville, Michi-gan raising a number of questions about the future and safety of nuclear plants.

I would appreciate as thorough a response to the questions she has raised as you can give in a letter I may forward her in reply.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Sincerely, Encl.

())I>> <<PII, )

5 ~t-7(

I'f wh C 1 C

>>,~.

DISTRICT OFFICES: 201 FEOERAL BOILOIRO $ 75 TERRITORIAL BO. BEIITOR HARSOR>> MICRIOAII PI<<ORE<< (616) 925 7962 MRS LLOYD PHILLIPS>> SCCRSTARY 107 FeoERAL BUILDIRC E. MAUMSEAND BRoADST. ADRIAR, MICRICAR PIRRIEI (517) 265 16SO MRS. FAUN PLATT>> SECRETARY

~

4s y

~ 4%

<,'.'"'~u c: ~ i=a ~

p iv>.TB +a'La C

~ ~

~ %

~ ~

p S > ('< J Michigan's Fourth District includes the Coun-ties of Berrien, Branch, Cass, Hi)lydatq $ yxcept t.itchiield City and Tovrnship), Lenaviee, r C e>

SIf. Joseph '(e>cepf'keonid'a~s<'favI'rsshipI," Van

,)c yp'g g, )>>

/(f; VAN DUPRN p g

, (g,

~~~'l

~.~

) i gn )'g ' g" " 'ga'I('s Mt .>ton, Burlap, qrp(f the(,Tqwpyh~pq of.gqtyndoq)5lnd lVekat~shb:i~ calhoun o uhty.~'t

~ << = ~!'.

'e<~(-~s

~

': 'a

~ ~

JU<I,J i

' ~

nl') <o'w' ~ I, fN.

~

~ ll l

l I I

PARIAN l CASS $ T. 40%L'PH llQA& I I

wnswte I LEHAVPK0 I I l

I QHt0 ie

Mitzi Johnston 2236 Pawnee Path Stevensvi1 1 e, MI 49127 May 14, 1976 Honorable Edward Hutchinson House of Representatives 2336 Rayburn Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Sir:

As a concerned resident of Michigan, I am writing to you about an issue that has recently been given a considerable amount of adverse publicity.

The issue 'I am referring to is that of nuclear power plant safety.

Because I am living in Stevensville, I have a particular interest in the Donald C. Cook Nuclear facility near Bridgman. An article that appeared in the "Herald-Palladium" on Tuesday, May 11th indicated there had been a small radioactive release in a part of the Cook,Plant. If an incident such as this is allowed to happen, what is to prevent an occurrence of greater consequence?

Are there any organizations or federal commissions set up to monitor and safeguard against any possible nuclear accidents? If so, do they strictly regulate the activities at nuclear plants involving safety requirements?

Do you favor stricter regulations for nuclear plants?

Do you feel the outcome of the nuclear initiative due to go before California voters on June 8th will have any effect on other states, in particular our state of Michigan? Also, has there been any recent legislation before congress on nuclear power plants; and if so, what has your stand been?

Do you see a definite future for atomic power as compared to conventional types of power? Can you see any justification for the billions of dollars being spent on present plants and the development of future plants?

Any information you can give me on this subject would be greatly appreciated.

Sincerely yours, Mitzi Johnston

a

~ ~

1 4

~ UNITED STATES NUCLEAWREGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, O. C. 20555 July 1, 1976 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY Director Office of the Federal Register National Archives and Records Service Washington, D. C. 20408

Dear Sir:

Enclosed for publication in the Federal Register are an original and two certified copies of a document entitled:

INDIANA AND HICHIGAN ELECTRIC COHPANY, ET AL Docket No. 50-3i5 NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF AN"NDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Publication of the above document at the earliest possible date would be appreciated.

Sincerely, Samuel J. Chilk Secretary of the Commission

Enclosures:

Original and 2 certified copies bcc: Central Files n o ation Services Legal Director Office of Congressional Affairs OGC SECY Files

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DOCKET NO. 50-315 INDIANA AND MICHIGAN ELECTRIC COMPANY NDIANA AND MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY I

DONALD C. COOK NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT I NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO CILITY PERATING LICENSE Notice is hereby given that the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has issued Amendment No. 16 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-58 issued to Indiana and Michigan Electric Company and Indiana IO and Michigan Power Company. The amendment revises the Technical Specifica-tions for operation of the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant Unit 1 located in Berrien County, Michigan, and is effective as of the date of its issuance.

The amendment changes certain Technical Specifications to extend the time interval within which the first demonstration of diesel generator operability following initial criticality may be performed.

The application for the amendment complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations. The Commission has made appropriate findings required by the Act and the Coomission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I. These findings are set forth in the license amendment.

Prior public notice of this amendment is not required because the amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration.

The Commission has determined that the issuance of this amendment will not result in any significant environmental impact and that, pursuant

~ ~

to 10 CFR 5 51.5(d)(4), an environmental statement, negative declaration or environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with issuance of this amendment.

For further details with respect to this action, see (1) the June 11; 1976 and June 24, 1976 letters of application for amendment, (2) Amendment No. 16 to License. No. DPR-58, (3) the Commission's letter to the licensee dated June 25, 1976, and (4) the Commission's related safety evaluation.

All of these items are available for. public inspection at the Comoission.'s Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, D. C., and at the St. Joseph Public Library, 500 Market Street, St. Joseph, Michigan 49085.

~ >> ~

A copy of items (2), (3), and (4) may be obtained upon request addressed to the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D. C. 20555, Attention: Director, Division of Project Management.

Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 25th day of June 1976.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY OMMISSION:

Karl Kniel, Chief Light'ater Reactors Branch No. 2 Division of Project Management,

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DOCKET NO. 50-315 INDIANA AND MICHIGAN ELECTRIC COMPANY INDIANA AND MICHIGAN POKIER COMPANY I

DONALD C. COOK NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT l NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO CILITY OPERATING LICENSE Notice is hereby given that the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commsssion (the Commission) has issued Amendment No. 16 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-58 issued to Indiana and Michigan, Electric Company and Indiana and Michigan Power Company. The amendment revises the Technical Specifica-tions for operation of the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant Unit 1 located in Berrien County, Michigan, and is effective as of the date of its issuance.

The amendment changes certain Technical Specifications to extend the time interval within which the first demonstration of diesel generator operability following initial criticality may be performed.

The application for the amendment complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations. The Commission has made appropriate findings required by the Act and the Comnission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I. These findings are set forth in the license amendment.

Prior public notice of this amendment is not required because the amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration.

The Commission has determined that the issuance of this amendment will C:

not result in any significant environmental impact and that, pursuant

to 10 CFR 5 51.5(d)(4), an environmental statement, negative declaration or environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with issuance, of this amendment.

For further details with respect to this action, see (1) the June 11; 1976 and June 24, 1976 letters of application for amendment, (2) Amendment I

No. 16 to License No. DPR-58, (3) the Commission's letter to the licensee dated June 25, 1976, and (4) the Commission's related safety evaluation.

All of these items are available for public inspection at the Comnission's Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, D. C., and at the St. Joseph Public Library, 500 Market Street, St. Joseph, Michigan 49085.

A copy of items (2), (3), and (4) may be obtained upon request addressed

~

to the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D. C. 20555, Attention: Director, D-'vision of Project Management.

Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 25th day of June 1976.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY OMMISSION:

Karl Kniel, Chief Light Water Reactors Branch No. 2 Division of Project Management

(

E Docket Hos.

50-316 Honorable Birch Eayh United States Senate

Dear Senator Bayh:

In their letter of E'arch 3, l975 to the President, which you forwarded to the Coauaission, Thomas Davis and Linda Sue Jacobs have, asked for an explanation of why construction work has stopped at the Donald C. Cook nuclear Plant near Sridgman, Hichigan. Explanation of the problem is simple, but the solution to the problem is not.

The operator of the D.C. Cook Plant, Indiana and Hichigan Electric Company, has told us that the company does not have enough money now to continue construction work on the second unit at the site.

The Cook plant consists of two nuclear units. Unit 1 is now in the later stages of operational testing and, if the testing continues as smoothly as it has so far, Unit 1 should be fully operational later this spring. Con-struction of Unit 2 was about 6OX cor1plete when. construction work was stopped-in late 1974. Ve do not know when construction vill be resumed.

The financial problems qf the Cook plant are not unique. Construction of several othe" nuclear power plants has been delayed by other electric utility companies for the same reason: lack of funds. High interest rates on borrowed money and higher construction costs due to .inflation are two of the major factors that have affected utilities'bility to raise the money needed to build new plants.

Although the Huclear Pegulatory Commission is aware of this problem, it is, as you know, not in a position to foster a solution. The financial problems of the utilities are entwined in the economic problems that are national in scope.

I hope that this letter will be helpful to you in I

replying'o Hr.

Hs. Jacobs 'nouiry. Davis'nd Sincerely, Original Signed Bg A. Giambusso A. Ciambusso, Director (

Division of Reactor Licensing See previous yellow for conc r epceOffi<<of h<<le<<pe ct<<Li<<nsing C

OPPICC SVRNAMRW

~ ,L'llR, 2;2 RABenedic ;as 0":RL~~

Aai ai%usso

'CL OAT C 3P 4/1/75 ,4/ /75 4/ /75 Form hRC-318 (Rev. 9.33) hECM 0240 A V, 8, OOYCRNMRNT PRINTINO OPPICKI IOT4 644 144

I

) 4 h

I t

Pl

Honorable Birch Bayh

Enclosure:

Ltr. to President.

from Thomas G. Davis and Linda Sue Jacobs dtd. 3/3/75 DISTRIBUTION:

Docket File NRC PDR 4eca4-PBR NRR Reading LWR 2-2 File EGCase ELD OCL (3)

GErtter (DR-8417)

JCook MGroff EHughes AFerguson RABenedict MService VAMoore IE (3)

KKniel JStolz'S chwencer OParr WButler DVassallo P. Cota MSlater OPPIC4~

SURNAME~

CATNAP Form hBC.318 (RST. 9.33) hBCbi 0240 4V 4 OOVCRNMENT PRINTINO OPPICEI 1074 400 100

0

't I

k I

l, I

%4+

L ir s~,J $ ~

$ (

g f'3 f

i ~

, FROÃ CONTROL NUMBER FILE LOCA,TION Sea. slm4 Ryk,'(xa8 ) 8417 DATE OF DOCUMENT ACTION COMPLETION DEADLINE TO cn8nte6 .(cee4 0/27 ACTION PROCESSING DATES JM, 41%$ 79 PREPARE FOR SIGNATURE OF:

'RgA

~ I Acknowledged Ch air mon Interip ly Director of Regulation F;g5 ~X Ctaeboana DESCRIPTION, g4g'Original Q Copy DO~her, R EMAR KS QQ~Q$ $ $

, R@B; eg Xtr fa 'iieet 8. &VS 6 f%aA SI4la 4aeeba ee Ae gcewm eaegeeeze with xaply

= Pmaidcec; 4eqeLt4ug ee elated elf We QcmM C. Coch @leal Vaxh emveXoye to Abaca" Greg@ 1M~yoa XPMT'EFERRED TO DATE IS NOTIFICATION TO THE JCAE RECOMMENDED?

Cys Cate Reebok Niaa) M-SiS F55, ) $9-N6 DIRECTOR OF REGULATION Form HQ-32 (1-73)

COMMUNICATIONS'CONTROL USA EC

Please note the att'ached letter from a constituent which I am forwarding for your consideration. It. would be greatly appreciated if you.would check into this matter. Upon completion of your investigation, please advise me of the status of this case in duplicate and return the original letter in an envelope Thsnk you for your assistance.

Sincerely, Birch Bayh I

United States nator 8417

4

'O~

lz

~C

V

"~"; 'Pw.

OFC 6" 'OdiNiSTAATOR 16ll West Clinton Goshen, TN,. 4652$

March 3, lj~tjg@R 2b Nl 9 08 The President of the United States 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Wash1ngton, D. C.,

Nr. President:

In order to become more informed about one of the =steps be1ng taken, to bring about a national independence of energy, we

'-"went todgy to the s 1 te 0 f the Cook i'uc lear Powei Stat 1Gll Gn Lake Michigan. When we arr1ved at the site we were informed that tours and, information sessions were not; being given and.

that all work on the proJect; was at a'tandstill.

r As you can understand, we were anzalled. We have been bombarded from everv source wit)> the assuza-ce that we had a problem with an energy shortage, but that every oossible stem was being taken to insure the ra~id transition of 1nternational sources to nationalindependence.

We do,not know how much money has been expended at this site to date, but to droo it no'~ is a waste. Each month our light bill rises t;.o Everv evening account we read.

for increases in new statist;1cs on a fuel adJustment.

unemployment. It would seem that this >>asting proJect; could be a source of cure for both energy and unemployment problems.

May we please have an exolanation as to why work has been stopped on this oroJect and ~hat we may expect 1n the oroJect's future.

Sincerely,

, thi, c ~

PV 't ~

Thomas u. Davis Ec Linda Sue Jacob.

cc: Vance Hartke Birch HayhM John Bradamas

4 I

L~

V

~

P r e

'ROM CONTROL NUMBER FILE LORATION

'ea~~ch find,) 1 I DATE OF DOCUMENT ACTI OMPLETION DEADLINE TO ACTION PROCESSING DATES PREPARE FOR SIGNATURE OF:

Acknow ledged 3i&f7$ Chairman Reply 'nterim Directar of Regulation Final X Chmbesse DESCRIPTION T pM

@Original Q Copy Q Other REMARKS ~%3@5 Baal ey Xte 5a Threat C. RaViS Igc Hmda Sea Jezebel CO @he PMSiCQQC ifLQQiC4QS C'0 SCSCCA% -Of WO CC82QM Ce CCOk $487?C RaLh eavoXope te She:

Qxcgg BcSKKN$

REFERRED TO DATE IS NOTIFICATION TO THE JCAE CSaebasso f&cekca RECOMMENDED?

Case

~et. FS.'ee) 50-N5 SR ) 59M,6 DO NOT DETACH THIS COPY DIRECTOR OF REGULATION Form HQ-32 lI-73)

COMMUNIC+TlONS .CONTROL .,.~, USA EC

~ k IP q

II r

~

II

~

~

r

+~

~ err r ~, I 'I yh ~1 Vr e> 'r=

~ ~

~

~ I

~

r ~ Lp L"

I

~

" 'I I ~

g rP ~ ~

rP ~

~ r

C V

~>

I ~

'lHttiteu Stated &mate MEMORANDuM Please note the attached letter from a constituent which I am forwarding for your considexati'on. Xt.would be greatly appxeciated if'ou.vould check into this u" tter. Upon completion of your investigation, please advise me of the status of this case in duplicate and return the original letter in an envelope Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely, Birch Eayh

/

United States nator

lg U.S. tN:. RGY PW lwCIIY OF C, OF PiQI ll,'ilS'iBATOR 1611 t1est Clinton Goshen, IN, 46526

%parch 3 ~

ltd)g4 2e Afh 9 PS

~ C. C The President of the United States 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, D. C.,

Nr. President:

In order to become more informed about one of the steps we being taken to bring about a national independence of energy, wenU today to he site of the Cook k~uclear Power Sv vi011 oil e s L

Lake Michigan. Nhen we arrived. at the site we were informed.

that tours and. information sessions were not being given and that all work on the prospect was at a standstill.

As you can understand., we were appalled. Ve have been bombarded from everv sou ce <<1th the assuzat;ce that we had a problem w1th an energy shortage, but that everv possible sten was being taken to insure the ra~id transition of international sources to national .independence.

Ve do not know how much money has been exoended at this site to date, but to droo it no's a <<aste. Each month our light bill rises to account for increases in a fuel ad,)ustment.

Every evening we read new statist1cs on unemployment. It.

would seem that this i'asting prospect could be a source of cure for both energv and unemployment problems.

Nay we please have an explanation as to whv work has been stopped on this oroJect and .'hat we may exoect in the pro)ect's future.

Sincerelv, Thomas ~. Davis & Linda Sue Jacobs cc: Vance Hartke Birch BayhM John Bradamas

I r'y

\pa g~

b i

D ocket Nos. 50-315 50-316 MAR 2 5 1975 .

Honorable John Brademas House of Representatives

Dear Mr.'rademas:

In their letter of March 3, 1975 to the President, which you forwarded to the Commission, Thames Davis and Linda Sue Jacobs have asked for an expla-nat1on of why construct1on work has stopped at the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant near Bridgman, Michigan. Explanation of the problem is a&pie, but the solution to the problem is not.

The operator of the D.C. Cook Plant, Indiana and Michigan Electric Company, has told us that the company doesn't have enough money now to continue construction work an the second unit at the site.

The Cook plant consists of two nuclear units. Unit 1 is now in the later stages of operational testing and, if the. testing program continues as smoothly as it has so far, Unit 1 should be fully operational later this spring. Construction of Unit 2 was about 60/ complete when construction work was stopped in late 1974. He do not know when construction will be resumed.

The financial problems of the Cook plant are'not unique. Construction of several other nuclear power plants has been delayed by other electric ut1lity conpanies for the same reason: lack of funds. High interest rates on borrawed money and h1gher construction costs due to inflation are two of the ma)or factors that have affected utilities'bility to raise the money needed to build new plants.

Although the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is, as you know, not in a is aware of this problem; position to foster a solution. The financial it problems of the utilities are entwined 1n the economic problems'that are national in scope.

I hope that this letter will be helpful to you in replying to Mf. Dilvis' and Ms. Jacobs'nqu1ry.

Sincerely, Original Sjgncd By A. GiRInbuSSO A. Giambusso,, Director Division of Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear eactp& Regulatian OPPICR~

LMR L 2-2 DDRL.

3 enedi'ct:as KKniel ""-

Qf 0URNAMK~ . AGiambusso.

OAT0 ~

3/21/75 '3'@;j /7"5 3/j t/75 3 jgP/75 POrm hEC-31S (R0T. 9.55) hZCM 0240 A V, 8, OOVRRNMRNT PRINTINO OPPICRI IOT4 020 I00

41

~ 4 4 J '

I I 4 )44 F11 I

it I

~ I I 4 '1 - 4 F

F)iit

'II, 'gt 14 JF W

> 'y )IJ l Il +.. 4 4 I', I P

')L *'

J- 4 'I

/ l I

4 . ~

,s )pfffg I

'I

DISTRIBUTION:

D'ocket File NRC PDR NRR REading LWR 2-2 File EGCase ELD OCL Q)

G. Ertter (DR-8343)

J. Cook M. Groff E. Hughes A. Ferguson R. A. Benedict M. Service VAMoore IE (3)

K. Kniel J. Stolz A. Schwencer O. Parr W. Butler D. Vassallo P. Cota M. Slater

'arr>cc9>-

e>>>>>>AMC~

DATC 9s'ons hKC.518 (Rev. 9 55) hECM 02 >0 oro cse >e e>see.> eso.eei

'er E

4 1

II II I

l

'P 'I I g I

FRCM CONTROL NUMBER FILE OCATION Rep. John 3radeiras (Tnd.) 8343-DATE OF DOCUMENT ACTION COMPLETION DEADLINE 3/10/75 3/24/75 To ACTION PROCESSING DATES PREPARE FOR SIGNATURE OF:

Acknowiedrted 3/1 f/75 'hoirman KRC Interi pl Director oi Regulation Giambusso F;no >

DFSCRIPTION Ltr @orig ai Q Copy C3 Other

<c REMARKS P" ?ITIS

">>ncl ltr fm Thomas G.>G Linda Sue Jacobs inquiring xe the itfark envelop'e to Attn:

status of the Donald C. Cook plant Linda Hoffman LPDR? !UCt IS HOTIFICATIOII TO THE JC~A~~

REFFRRED TO II

// g Gi embus so f/ac t ion 3/17/75 RECOMMENDED?~

AJFF ir 2 -8/r ~/7~ "

Case Docket Piles) 50-315 PDR 50 316 DO NOT DETACH THIS COPY DIRECTOR OF REGULATION Form HQ-32 (1-73)

COMMUtilCATIONS'CONTROL USAEC

FROM CONTROL NUMSER FILE 'CATION Rep. John Brademas (l:nd.)

DATE OF DOCUMENT 8343 ACTION COMPLETION DEADLINE ~

3/10/75 3/m 75 0 ACTION PROCESSING DATES PREPARF: FOR SIGNATURE OF:

Acr<now!edged 3/14'/75 Chairman HRC Interi Fin. ~ P pl

~X Director of Regulation Giambusso DESCRIPTION Ltr K)original Q Copy Q Other REMARKS Encl ltr fm Thomas G

>t 7 Case Docket Piles) 50>>315 PDR 50-316 DO NOT DETACH THIS COPY DIRECTOR OF REGULATION Form HQ-32 (1-73) COMMUNICATIONS'CONTROL USAEC I (Congress of ffje Rafts States %)ouse of Scpccs'cntatibes / 5Hnsgfngton, Ã).C. 19 75 Nuclear RegulatoryC'o'mIoLsion Sir: The attached. communication is sent for your consideration. Pleas'e investigate he statements contained. therein and. forward me I thh necessary information for re-ply, re re-4 SP Yours truly, John Brademas, M C. 3rd D., Ind. Attn: Linda Hoffman ~ h I s 1611 West Clin'ton Goshen, IN 46526 March 3, 19'75 The President of the United States 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, D. C. Mr. President: t In order to become more 1nformed about one of the',, s$ eos be1ng taken to bring about a national indenendence of energy, we wenc today to the site of the Cook ."nuclear Power Station on Lake M1chigan. When we arrived at the s1te we were'. 1nformed that tours and information sessions were not being given and. that all work on the proJect was at a standst111. As you can understand, we were arvalled. We have been bombarded from everv source with the assurance that we had a problem with an energy shortage, but that every'ossible sCen was be1ng taken to insure the ra~id transition,'of international sources to national independence. We do not know how much money has been expended at this site to but to drov it no" is a waste. Each month our light

billdate, rises to account for increases 1n a fuel adJustment.

Every evening we read new statistics on unemployment. would seem that this wasting proJect could be a source of It cure for both energv and unemployment problems. May we please have an explanation as to whv work has been stopped on this oroJect and ~hat we may expect in the oroJect's future. V Sincerely, Thomas ~. Davis Ec Linda Sue Jacobs cc: Vance Hartke Birch Bayh John Bradamas~ ~)~<~~~ /~/" ~/ ge~ gL It'wc mate~ TIIA8~~ - I t It 1 Congress of tfje 'Snitch Statee goose of Repeedentntibes 58asgnotoa, 33.C. ,l9 75 Nuclear Regulatory CommLaion Sir: Tne attached communication is sent for your consideration. Please investigate the statements contained therein and forward. me the necessary information for re-ply, re re-Yours truly, ~ John Brademas, ~ C. 3rd D., Ind. Attn: Linda Hoffman C<< ~ ~V'<<<<<<'<<: <<<<% '<<<<*4 <<, <<<< 1611 West Clinton Goshen, IN 4'526 March 3, 1975 .The President of the United St;ates 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, D. C. Mr. President;: In order to become more inform d about one of the steas be1ng taken to bring about a national independence of energy, we we .~ today to the site of the Coo'- N"cle"- Power Station on Zake Michigan. When 'e arr1ved at; the sit;e we were 1nformed that tours and information sessions were not being given and that all work on the proJect was at a standst111. As you can understand. we were a.z.alled. We have been tombarded from everv source with the assu:a"ce that ve had a problem with an energy shortage, but that everv oossiole ster .was,.being taken to insure the ra"id transit'.on nf international sources to national indeoendence. We do'not; know how much money has been exoended at this site to date, but to droe bill it no's a waste. >~ch month our light rises to account for increases in a fuel adJustment. Every evening we read. new statistics on unemployment. It would seem=that this rasting proJect could. be a source of cure for both energv and unem~loyzent rroblems. May we please have an explanation as to vhv work has been st;opped on this aroJect and .~hat we may expect 1n the oroJect',s future. Sincerelv,'homas ~. Dav1s & L,inda Sue Jacobs cc: Vance Hartke Birch Eayh John Bradamas~ e ,) ~ s. Al, 'A C l h I 5 E( 1 C 1 4-4 ~ '" H' I u P

CONTROL NUMBER F IL E LOCATION FPOM'repk:Jetra szsrtrerrs, (to@.yy .8343 DATE OF DOCUMENT TION COMPLETION DEADLINE

~/~~j'n TO ACTION PROCESSING DATES PREPARE FOR SIGNATURE OF: Acknowledged 0/i4 79 Chairman 5RC Inteiim Reply Director of Regulation Final Z If iaCmSOO REMARKS DESCRIPTION LCC'Original Q Copy Q Other Eeet Lee 5a Xhoaus G. 5 Linda Sue Jacal ~string rc thf: Marlc cavHoge to the At.tn: elates ef the Qanaid C. Cook phmt Ands 1Mfeen REFERRED TO DATE IS NOTIFICATION TO THE JCAE RECOMMENDED? CLambveso SfactLen Sfi7)7$ Cye: Cgse Boche 0 les} 50-M5 PSR 59-315 DIRECTOR OF REGULATION Form HQ.32 (I

t. DO NOT DETACH THIS COPY 73),'SAEC COMMUNICATIONS CONTROL

p~ ~ 8 ~ % g$ ~ 1 .r 1 C b I 1 I p tc V

• I q

Congress Of tfje Knits) State5 P)ouse of Bepeedentatibes 58asfjlnglon, Q.C. ,l9 75 Nuclear Regulatory CommLBion The attached. communication is sent for your consideration. Please investigate the statements contained. therein and forward. me the necessary information for re-ply, re re-SP g.r. Yours truly, John Brademas, M C. 3rd D., End. Attn: Linda HoMnan ~, ~ 1611 West Clinton Goshen, IN 46526 Narch 3, 1975 The President o. the United States 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, D. C. llr. President: Xn order to become more 1nformed about one of the steas being taken to bring about a national indenendence of energy, we wene today to the site 'of the Cook "ucle Power St tioxl Gl1 Lake Michigan. When we arrived at the site we were informed that tours and informat1on sessions were not being given and that all work on the pro)ect was at a standstill. As you can understand, we ~cere a. palled. Ve have beer. Lombarded from everv source with the assura",ce that ve had a problem w1th an energy shortage, but that everv possible sten was being taken to insure the ra"id transit!on nf 1nternational sources to national indeoendence. We do not know how much money has been exoended at this s1te to date, but to droo it no's a waste. Each month our 11ght bill rises to account for increases in a fuel ad,]ustment. Everv even1ng we read new statist1cs on unemployment. It would seem that'his iasting pro)ect could be a source of. cure for both energv and unemoloyvent problems. Nay we please have an explanation as to vhv work has been stopped on'this oro)ect and .~hat ve mav expect 1n the oroJect's future. Sincerelv, Thomas ~. Dav1s 4 L1nda Sue Jacobs

• ~ I\

cc: Vance Hartke Birch Eayh John Bradaaas~