# Emergency Planning and Preparedness Exercise Requirements for Nuclear Power Plants

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A94-7065

## Record

- **Collection:** Federal Register
- **Document type:** Uncategorized Document
- **Published:** March 25, 1994

## Text

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 50

RIN: 3150-AD40

Emergency Planning and Preparedness Exercise Requirements for
Nuclear Power Plants

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its
emergency planning regulations in order to update the Commission's
emergency planning exercise requirements for nuclear power plants and
clarify ambiguities that have surfaced in the implementation of the
regulations. These amendments also make the NRC regulations consistent
with FEMA regulations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 23, 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael T. Jamgochian, Office of
Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555, telephone (301-492-3918).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On August 19, 1980 (45 FR 55402), the NRC published a final rule
that revised its emergency planning regulations. The final rule became
effective on November 3, 1980. On July 6, 1984 (49 FR 27733), the NRC
amended its emergency planning regulations to relax the frequency of
participation by State and local governmental authorities in emergency
preparedness exercises at nuclear power reactor sites. The amendments
were based on the NRC's experience gained in observing and evaluating
emergency preparedness exercises since 1980.
Further experience has shown that the language setting forth the
requirements in 10 CFR part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.F.3 concerning
full or partial participation by State or local governments in the
biennial (offsite) exercise is unnecessarily complicated. The NRC
published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register on
June 28, 1993 (58 FR 34539). Public comments were requested by
September 13, 1993. The proposed rule did not seek to change the
requirements set forth in Appendix E, Section IV.F.3 (a), (b), and (d)
but to clarify and simplify the text of the regulation. Offsite
authority responsibilities remain unchanged.
Under the proposed rule the offsite plans for each site were to be
exercised biennially with full participation by each offsite authority
having a role under the plan. Further, where the offsite authority has
a role under the plan for more than one site, it would be required to
participate in one exercise fully every two years and partially
participate in other offsite plan exercises in this period. The only
amended requirements were those set forth in Appendix E, Section
IV.F.3(e) where the interval for an ingestion exposure pathway exercise
was changed from 5 to 6 years, and Appendix E, Section IV.F.3(c) where
the requirement that all States within the plume exposure pathway
emergency planning zone (EPZ) for a given site fully participate in an
offsite exercise for that site at least once every 7 years was deleted.

Public Comments

A total of 12 comment letters were received, of which 5 were from
utilities, 6 were from State emergency management agencies and one from
NUMARC. All commenters generally agreed with the proposed rulemaking
except for one State agency.
Comment: The one commentor that opposed the rule change noted that,

We do not believe, however, the NRC has substantiated its claim
that the seven-year return requirement is unnecessary. Similar
arguments have surfaced in previous emergency planning issues, and
our response is the same: The high level of industry sensitivity to
emergency preparedness is a direct result of comprehensive
requirements for emergency preparedness programs and exercises.
Elimination of those requirements runs the risk of returning the
industry to pre-TMI levels of preparedness.

Response: The Commission does not agree that deleting the 7 year
return frequency ``* * * runs the risk of returning the industry to
pre-TMI levels of preparedness.'' The Commission is confident that this
will not occur because the Commission has found that multi-sites
states, when not fully participating in an exercise at a specific site
will usually partially participate at a significant level of activity
every 2 years at that specific site in order to support the
participation of the appropriate local governments. The Commission has
found that this level of exercise participation provides adequate
emergency response training for State and local governments. The
Commission believes that this rulemaking does not have an adverse
impact on public health and safety because State emergency response
personnel continuously respond to actual emergencies and experience has
shown that states through a combination of full and partial
participation exercises maintain an adequate level of response
capability. A formal requirement for a State to return to a specific
site every 7 years to participate in an exercise has proven to be
unnecessary. Nonetheless, nothing prevents a State from returning to a
specific site to participate in an exercise whenever it deems
warranted.
Comment: Several comments suggested additional clarification to the
emergency planning regulations.
Response: Although the Commission always appreciates suggestions on
clarifying its regulations, the Commission at this time believes that
all of the suggested changes would be inappropriate to include in this
rulemaking proceeding because the suggested revisions are beyond the
scope of this rulemaking.
Comment: Several commenters noted that the proposed wording for the
ingestions pathway exercise was not consistent with the FEMA
requirement and could be interpreted differently than intended. They
suggested the following requirement, ``A State should fully participate
in the ingestion pathway portion of exercises at least once every six
years. In States with more than one site, the State should rotate this
participation from site to site.''
Response: The Commission agrees with the suggested wording and has
incorporated this comment in the final rule.

Discussion

The Commission finds that the current regulation has resulted in a
relatively complicated description of the requirements for exercise
participation by State and local governments who have offsite planning
responsibility for more than one nuclear power plant. This final rule
simplifies and clarifies this requirement. In addition, Appendix E is
revised to reflect that the interval for an ingestion exposure pathway
exercise be changed from at least once every 5 years to at least once
every 6 years (FEMA's ingestion pathway exercise requirement is at
least once every 6 years). The change in the interval would match the
biennial frequency required for exercises of offsite plans. Further,
Appendix E is also revised to eliminate the 7 year return frequency
requirement because it has proven to be unnecessary to achieve the
underlying purpose of the rule as well as being burdensome to states
which are within the plume exposure pathway for multiple sites (FEMA
does not have a return frequency requirement). Both changes assure
compatibility with FEMA requirements and thus avoid confusion among
licensees and State governments. Notwithstanding elimination of the 7
year return frequency requirement, the Commission believes that offsite
authorities should rotate their full participation in exercises among
sites if they are within the plume exposure pathway for more than one
site.
The Commission codified the 7 year return frequency in the July 6,
1984 (49 FR 27733), amendment to the emergency planning regulations.
This amendment provides that at least once every 7 years, all States
within the plume exposure pathway EPZ of a given site must fully
participate in an offsite exercise for that site. In doing so, the
Commission noted that ``the final rule is not totally consistent with
FEMA's final regulation (44 CFR part 350). This inconsistency lies in
the area of return frequency of multiple-site states as previously
discussed. The FEMA position on return frequency is a significant
departure from the NRC's proposed regulation of July 21, 1983 (48 FR
33307). The Commission believes that more study is needed before
deletion of the return frequency requirement can be justified.''
The Commission now believes that sufficient experience has been
gained in the observation and evaluation of emergency preparedness
exercises at nuclear power reactor sites to conclude that the 7 year
return frequency should be deleted.
The Commission has found that multi-site States, when not fully
participating in an exercise at a specific site will usually partially
participate at a significant level of activity every 2 years at that
specific site in order to support the participation of the appropriate
local governments. The Commission has found that this level of exercise
participation provides adequate emergency response training for State
and local governments. Additionally, a provision still exists in the
regulation which permits State or local government participation in any
licensee's drills or exercises. A State or local government may
consider its response capability to be less than optimal because of an
unusually large personnel turnover or because there have been limited
responses to real emergencies in the community. The regulation still
requires the licensees to provide for State or local government
participation if they indicate such a desire. This final revision does
not have any adverse impact on public health and safety because State
emergency response personnel continuously respond to actual emergencies
and experience has shown that states through a combination of full and
partial participation exercises maintain an adequate level of response
capability. A formal requirement for a State to return to a specific
site every 7 years to participate in an exercise has proven to be
unnecessary. This rulemaking deletes that unnecessary, unwarranted and
burdensome requirement. Nonetheless, nothing prevents a State from
returning to a specific site to participate in an exercise whenever it
deems warranted.
Lastly, this revision deletes past due dates (see section F(2) (a))
because they are now meaningless.
FEMA concurs with the amendments in this rulemaking.

Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Availability

The Commission has determined under the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969, as amended, and the Commission's regulations in
subpart A of 10 CFR part 51, that this rule is not a major Federal
action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment;
and therefore, an environmental impact statement is not required. This
regulation updates and clarifies the emergency planning regulations
relating to exercises. It does not involve any modification to any
plant or revise the need for or the standards for emergency plans, and
there is no adverse effect on the quality of the environment. The
environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact on which
this determination is based are available for inspection at the NRC
Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW (Lower Level), Washington, DC
20036.

Paperwork Reduction Act Statement

This final rule does not contain a new or amended information
collection requirement subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Existing requirements were approved by the
Office of Management and Budget approval number 3150-0011.

Regulatory Analysis

The Commission has prepared a regulatory analysis on this
regulation. The analysis examines the costs and benefits of the
alternatives considered by the Commission. The analysis is available
for inspection in the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW.
(Lower Level), Washington, DC 20036. Single copies of the analysis may
be obtained from Michael Jamgochian, Office of Nuclear Regulatory
Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555.
Telephone: (301) 492-3918.

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

The regulation does not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The final rule updates and clarifies
ambiguities in the emergency planning regulations relating to
exercises. Nuclear power plant licensees do not fall within the
definition of small business in Section 3 of the Small Business Act, 15
U.S.C. 632, the Small Business Size Standards of the Small Business
Administration in 13 CFR part 121, or the Commission's Size Standards
published at 56 FR 56671 (November 6, 1991). Therefore, in accordance
with the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the
Commission hereby certifies that this final rule, will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
and that, therefore, a regulatory flexibility analysis need not be
prepared.

Backfit Analysis

This regulation does not impose any new requirements on production
or utilization facilities. The regulation deletes the requirement that
all states within the plume exposure pathway EPZ for a given site fully
participate in an offsite exercise for that specific site at least
every 7 years. It also relaxes the requirement to perform an ingestion
exposure pathway exercise from every 5 years to every 6 years. These
changes would permit, but do not require, licensees to change their
emergency plans and procedures. Therefore, these changes are not
considered backfits as defined in 10 CFR 50.109 (a)(1).

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 50

Antitrust, Classified information, Criminal penalties, Fire
protection, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nuclear power plants and reactors, Radiation protection, Reactor siting
criteria, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, and under the authority of
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization
Act of 1974, as amended, and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553, the NRC is adopting
the following amendments to 10 CFR part 50.

PART 50--DOMESTIC LICENSING OF PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION
FACILITIES

1. The authority citation for part 50 continues to read as follows:

Authority: Secs. 102, 103, 104, 105, 161, 182, 183, 186, 189, 68
Stat. 936, 937, 938, 948, 953, 954, 955, 956, as amended, sec. 234,
83 Stat. 1244, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2132, 2133, 2134, 2135, 2201,
2232, 2233, 2236, 2239, 2282): secs. 201, as amended, 202, 206, 88
Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846).
Section 50.7 also issued under Pub. L. 95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat.
2951 as amended by Pub. L. 102-486, Sec. 2902, 106 Stat 3123, (42
U.S.C. 5851). Section 50.10 also issued under secs. 101, 185, 68
Stat. 936, 955, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2131, 2235), sec. 102, Pub. L.
91-190, 83 Stat. 853 (42 U.S.C. 4332). Section 50.13, 50.54 (dd) and
50.103 also issued under sec. 108, 68 Stat. 939, as amended (42
U.S.C. 2138). Sections 50.23, 50.35, 50.55, and 50.56 also issued
under sec. 185, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2235). Sections 50.33a,
50.55a and Appendix Q also issued under sec. 102, Pub. L. 91-190, 83
Stat. 853 (42 U.S.C. 4332). Sections 50.34 and 50.54 also issued
under sec. 204, 88 Stat. 1245 (42 U.S.C. 5844). Sections 50.58,
50.91, and 50.92 also issued under Pub. 97-415, 96 Stat. 2073 (42
U.S.C. 2239). Section 50.78 also issued under sec. 122, 68 Stat. 939
(42 U.S.C. 2152). Sections 50.80, 50.81 also issued under sec. 184,
68 Stat. 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2234). Appendix F also issued
under sec. 187, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2237).

2. Appendix E to part 50 is amended by revising Section IV.F. to
read as follows:
Appendix E to Part 50--Emergency Planning and Preparedness for
Production and Utilization Facilities
* * * * *

IV. Content of Emergency Plans

* * * * *

F. Training.

1. The program to provide for: (a) The training of employees and
exercising, by periodic drills, of radiation emergency plans to
ensure that employees of the licensee are familiar with their
specific emergency response duties, and (b) The participation in the
training and drills by other persons whose assistance may be needed
in the event of a radiation emergency shall be described. This shall
include a description of specialized initial training and periodic
retraining programs to be provided to each of the following
categories of emergency personnel:
i. Directors and/or coordinators of the plant emergency
organization;
ii. Personnel responsible for accident assessment, including
control room shift personnel;
iii Radiological monitoring teams;
iv. Fire control teams (fire brigades);
v. Repair and damage control teams;
vi. First aid and rescue teams;
vii. Medical support personnel;
viii. Licensee's headquarters support personnel;
ix. Security personnel.
In addition, a radiological orientation training program shall
be made available to local services personnel; e.g., local emergency
services/Civil Defense, local law enforcement personnel, local news
media persons.
2. The plan shall describe provisions for the conduct of
emergency preparedness exercises as follows: Exercises shall test
the adequacy of timing and content of implementing procedures and
methods, test emergency equipment and communications networks, test
the public notification system, and ensure that emergency
organization personnel are familiar with their duties.3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\3\Use of site specific simulators or computers is acceptable
for any exercise.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

a. A full participation4 exercise which tests as much of
the licensee, State and local emergency plans as is reasonably
achievable without mandatory public participation shall be conducted
for each site at which a power reactor is located. This exercise
shall be conducted within two years before the issuance of the first
operating license for full power (one authorizing operation above 5%
of rated power) of the first reactor and shall include participation
by each State and local government within the plume exposure pathway
EPZ and each state within the ingestion exposure pathway EPZ. If the
full participation exercise is conducted more than one year prior to
issuance of an operating licensee for full power, an exercise which
tests the licensee's onsite emergency plans shall be conducted
within one year before issuance of an operating license for full
power. This exercise need not have State or local government
participation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\4\``Full participation'' when used in conjunction with
emergency preparedness exercises for a particular site means
appropriate offsite local and State authorities and licensee
personnel physically and actively take part in testing their
integrated capability to adequately assess and respond to an
accident at a commercial nuclear power plant. ``Full participation''
includes testing major observable portions of the onsite and offsite
emergency plans and mobilization of state, local and licensee
personnel and other resources in sufficient numbers to verify the
capability to respond to the accident scenario.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Each licensee at each site shall annually exercise the onsite
emergency plan.
c. Offsite plans for each site shall be exercised biennially
with full participation by each offsite authority having a role
under the plan. Where the offsite authority has a role under a
radiological response plan for more than one site, it shall fully
participate in one exercise every two years and shall, at least,
partially participate5 in other offsite plan exercises in this
period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\5\``Partial participation'' when used in conjunction with
emergency preparedness exercises for a particular site means
appropriate offsite authorities shall actively take part in the
exercise sufficient to test direction and control functions; i.e.,
(a) protective action decision making related to emergency action
levels, and (b) communication capabilities among affected State and
local authorities and the licensee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

d. A State should fully participate in the ingestion pathway
portion of exercises at least once every six years. In States with
more than one site, the State should rotate this participation from
site to site.
e. Licensees shall enable any State or local government located
within the plume exposure pathway EPZ to participate in annual
exercises when requested by such State or local government.
f. Remedial exercises will be required if the emergency plan is
not satisfactorily tested during the biennial exercise, such that
NRC, in consultation with FEMA, cannot find reasonable assurance
that adequate protective measures can be taken in the event of a
radiological emergency. The extent of State and local participation
in remedial exercises must be sufficient to show that appropriate
corrective measures have been taken regarding the elements of the
plan not properly tested in the previous exercises.
g. All training, including exercises, shall provide for formal
critiques in order to identify weak or deficient areas that need
correction. Any weaknesses or deficiencies that are identified shall
be corrected.
h. The participation of State and local governments in an
emergency exercise is not required to the extent that the applicant
has identified those governments as refusing to participate further
in emergency planning activities, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.47(c)(1). In
such cases, an exercise shall be held with the applicant or licensee
and such governmental entities as elect to participate in the
emergency planning process.
* * * * *
Dated at Rockville, MD, this 14th day of March, 1994.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
James M. Taylor,
Executive Director for Operations.
[FR Doc. 94-7065 Filed 3-24-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A94-7065. Public record. Not legal advice.
