ML19345G579

Request for Subpoena of Agricultural Agents of York & Dauphin Counties J Smith & He Stewart,Since Agents Are Cited in Usda Plan for Nuclear Power Generating Station Incidents. Certificate of Svc Encl

ML19345G579
Person / Time
Site:	Three Mile Island
Issue date:	03/18/1981
From:	Aamodt M AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Shared Package
ML19345G563	List: ML19345G562 ML19345G569 ML19345G573 ML19345G579
References
NUDOCS 8104070548
Download: ML19345G579 (8)

Text

-

M I

'h 9 -

pg

~

7{ 70*2%g nam-Ylfgygr a:9 -cc#. 't y

WM 9'q t--I c

\931,

^

'I' United States of America

. . ~., g

~

3 Nuclear Regulatory Commission x

2 s ' s i \ "l' 3efore the Atomie Safety and Licensine 3 card In the Matter of Metropolitan Mison Company, Three Mile Island Nuclear Generation Station, Unit 1 Locket ,. 50-289 Request for Subpeona of Agricultural Agents of York and Lauphin Counties Intervenor Aamodt requests that the Board subpeona the agricultural agents of York and Lauphin County for the following reasons:

1. They are cited in the terartment of Azriculture ilan for Nuclear lower Generating Sta' tion Incidents, Annex 3 of the Commonwealth of 'rennsylvania's irergency Plan, Chapter III, p. 11, 5. United States Department of Agriculture. (att:9hed)

Regional directors are to establish conti.nuing liaison with County Agricultural Agents _to insure coordination of assistance activities and damage assessments.

2. Directive Penrose Hallowell, Secretary of igriculture, Cominonwealth of Pennsylvania, to Eureau Directors, Regional Directors, Office Chiefs, Subject Fixed Nuclear Incidents,8/30/79, p. 2 (attached), para. 3

3. Commonwealth of Fennsylvania's Testimony of Dr.1.ax.

A. Van Buskirk, Jr. and Dr. John W. Gable Regarding Contention G-2, n-4(A), and di-5(G) (I.ivestock

.,vacuation), 2/26/81, p. 2, para. 2; p. 4. (attached).

In order to, assess the capability of the plan to care for 810407054 8- _

di and/or evacuate livestcck in the event of a nuclear incicent at IEI, Unit 1, the degree of knowledge, agreement _and capability of the County Agents of all of the counties within the 10 mile EFZ needs to be questioned. Since Dauphin and York C? unties were mentionec as the counties of prime interest due to their major contribution geographically to the 10 mile EiZ. (Transcript 3/17/S1) and because a large number of farms are located in York and Lauphin Counties within the 10 mile EFZ and because Intervenor or an agent of Intervenor has been in contact with the County Agents in York and Lauphin Counties, the particular agents in these two counties are requested.

The identity and address for purpose of subpeona of the individuals are:

John Smith, County Extension Agent, 112 11easant Avenue, York, Fennsylva.nia 17402 Harold E. Stewart, County dxtension Agent, 75 South Haucks Road, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17109

,E'spect fully submitted, I m i AL u,4:uj' %edf L

harch 18, 1981

i R:

% r,R'  ?:.'

-W.ia, L

n. .

it :(M .

15:

- for immediato notification to the twnnsylvania Emergency Management Office Agency, PEMA, and to t.be L arent County Emergency Management Dcpartment of Agriculture organizational when an incident occurs.

elements will be alerte'd to the incidents th[ough establi_shed command that information announcing an emer-

. c,h annel.s ; however, in the event immediate action should be gency is received by a Regional Office, f Agricul-taken to_ report all information available to the Secretary o ture.

County and local covernments have the primary responsibility

. The County f.or initial of fsite response to a nuclear incident.

Emergency Management Office is the primary planning agency nearest the facility and Regional Directors should establish continuing liai-son with the county to coordinate Agriculture assistance and surveil-

'The County Emergency lance activities in the area of the incident.

Management Of fice' will coordinate operations in the event an arca is designated a restricted arca to include entrance and exit control and radiological surveillance and this information must be available to Agriculture field personnel to preclude excessive radiological exposure.

The United States Department of Agriculture has established in

-every county USDA County Emergency Boards to coordinate USDA state All of - the USDA agencies o county disaster assistance efforts.

having major emergency responsibilities are represented on:these boards.

liaison with _Ceunty

,> Rcgional Directors are to establish continuing Agricultural Agents to insure coordination of assistance activities

~And damage assessments.

l

)

B Mt; / /

.:=_ 5. United States Decartment of Acriculture:

tE~~

. ~:

The United States Department of Agriculture has established in every county, USDA County Emergency Boards to coordinate USDA State or county disaster assistance efforts. All of the USDA agencies having major emergency responsibilities are represented on these boards. ' Regional Directors are to esta-

• 9 blish continuing liaison with County Agricultural Agents to insure coordination of assistance acrivities and damage assess-ments. .

.= .s 2 T, 4

=-

?b5b' ^

l 1

l I

l

s.m. .. p M

.7

. 1,4c- f

--s s-.,

- / s.-: ,

x.--

J' ' radiation injury. The guidance takes into censideration the _- telerance_

-47 livestock have to the effects of icw level radiatien and it minimi:es exposure on the part of the far=er during the release of radicactive

=aterial. The e=phasis on the use of shalter and protec-ad #aad a g er-provides time for an assess =ent of the size and duration of the radiation h.szards.

The plan is censistent with the sheltering of livesteck concept and it facilitates follow-on recovery action in that it advises farn cperators to report'their status and the status of their livestock 3 to their county agent and/or their county e=ergency =anagement_of', ice if a precautionary evacuation advisory is issued to the public.

Should the assessment of the incident indicate the evacuatien of-pecple will continue for a protracted pericd and that accumulated doses will be a' health hazard to the. farm cperators, a_ssistance can be arranged in caring for livestock. Should the assessment of the incident indicate the accumulated doses will be a hazard to the live-stock, a decision may be made to permit farm operators en an individ-dal, case-by-case basis to relocate livestock. Of prime i=portance to these relocation decisions will be consideration of the consecuence to =cvement of livestock relative to infectious or contagicus diseases.

The mingling of livestock and sharing of equipment en: cute to and at relocation sites increases the chances of exposure to dangerous transmissible diseases: .During the past several years, cutbreaks of Brucellosis and Tuberculosis in cattle and Pseudorabies in swine and cattle have occurred in counties surrounding TMI. The =ove=ent of i livestock results in a greatly increased risk of t.kese diseases and