96-15155. Production and Utilization Facilities; Emergency Planning and Preparedness Exercise Requirements  

  • [Federal Register Volume 61, Number 116 (Friday, June 14, 1996)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 30129-30132]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 96-15155]
    
    
    
    ========================================================================
    Rules and Regulations
                                                    Federal Register
    ________________________________________________________________________
    
    This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents 
    having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed 
    to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published 
    under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
    
    The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. 
    Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each 
    week.
    
    ========================================================================
    
    
    Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 116 / Friday, June 14, 1996 / Rules 
    and Regulations
    
    [[Page 30129]]
    
    
    
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
    
    10 CFR Part 50
    
    RIN 3150-AF20
    
    
    Production and Utilization Facilities; Emergency Planning and 
    Preparedness Exercise Requirements
    
    AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
    
    ACTION: Final rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is revising its 
    emergency planning regulations. This amendment allows greater 
    flexibility in the licensee's emergency preparedness training 
    activities in the 2-year period between biennial full-participation 
    exercises. The amendment preserves the requirement that each licensee, 
    at each site, conduct an emergency preparedness exercise biennially, 
    with full participation by State and local governments that are within 
    the plume exposure pathway emergency planning zone (EPZ); reduces the 
    required frequency of exercising the licensee's onsite emergency plan 
    from annual to biennial; requires licensees to ensure that adequate 
    emergency response capabilities are maintained between biennial 
    exercises by conducting drills, at least one of which must involve some 
    of the principal functional areas of the licensee's onsite emergency 
    response capabilities; and requires licensees to continue enabling 
    State and local governments that are in the plume exposure pathway 
    emergency planning zones (EPZs) to participate in drills. With this 
    amendment, the Commission is granting, in part, a petition for 
    rulemaking submitted by the Virginia Electric Power Company on December 
    9, 1992 (PRM-50-58).
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE: July 15, 1996.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Contact Michael T. Jamgochian, Office of 
    Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
    Washington, DC 20555 (301-415-6534); E-mail MTJ1@nrc.gov.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    Background
    
        The NRC received a petition for rulemaking submitted on December 9, 
    1992, by the Virginia Electric Power Company that was assigned Docket 
    No. PRM-50-58. The petitioner requested that the NRC amend, Section 
    IV.F.2., of 10 CFR part 50, appendix E, ``Emergency Planning and 
    Preparedness for Production and Utilization Facilities,'' to change the 
    requirement that each site exercise its emergency plan biennially 
    rather than annually. The petitioner's proposed amendment would have 
    required each licensee to conduct a biennial full participation 
    exercise of the emergency plan at each site and to take actions 
    necessary to ensure that its emergency response capability is 
    maintained during the 2-year interval. The petitioner believes that the 
    annual graded exercise is but one of many indicators designed to 
    provide reasonable assurance that actions can and will be taken during 
    an emergency situation that will provide for the health and safety of 
    the public. The NRC published a notice of receipt for the petition on 
    March 4, 1993 (58 FR 12341). A total of 32 comment letters were 
    received and considered when developing a proposed rule concerning the 
    issues raised by the petitions.
        A notice of proposed rulemaking was published in the Federal 
    Register on April 14, 1995 (60 FR 19002). Public comments were 
    requested by July 13, 1995. A total of 18 comment letters were 
    received, of which 12 utilities, 2 State emergency management agencies, 
    and the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) supported the proposed rule 
    change. One State emergency management agency and an environmental 
    group opposed the proposed rule change. One letter received from a 
    State emergency management agency had no comment on the proposed rule 
    change.
    
    NRC Response to Public Comments
    
        The comment letters that were received provided many thought-
    provoking and constructive comments. The Commission's evaluation of and 
    response to these comments is presented in the following section.
        Issue 1. While the biennial exercise provides the opportunity for 
    broad based State and local participation in exercising offsite plans 
    and procedures, the annual graded utility exercises enhance the 
    biennial exercise process by providing State liaison personnel and 
    their utility counterparts the opportunity to remain proficient. A 2-
    year gap will lessen proficiency.
        Response. It is clearly not the Commission's intent to lessen the 
    proficiency at any level of the emergency planning organization (onsite 
    or offsite) with the rule change. The Commission believes that 
    interaction and training problems that might arise as a result of 
    deleting the annual onsite exercise would be resolved by requiring 
    licensees to enable any State or local Government to participate in the 
    licensee's drills when requested by the State or local Government. The 
    Commission is confident that, if a State governmental emergency 
    response agency feels the need to participate in a drill that would 
    require specific offsite interaction and decisionmaking capability, the 
    licensee would accommodate the State agency's request within the 
    framework of the drills that the licensee conducts throughout the 2-
    year period between the biennial full participation exercise. In fact, 
    a State who was originally against granting the petition for rulemaking 
    because of similar concerns stated the following in their comment on 
    the proposed rule.
    
    ``We were among those initially opposed to the Virginia Electric 
    Power Company petition that prompted this rule change, primarily 
    because of a perceived potential for a diminution of emergency 
    preparedness capability on the part of licensees. However, we 
    acknowledge that the compromise embodied in the Commission's 
    proposed rule change offers adequate assurance that ongoing licensee 
    emergency preparedness activities will continue at a reasonable 
    level. Because of the number of licensees and the capacity of the 
    State's emergency response organizations, when appropriate (this 
    State) will invoke the language of the proposed rule change that 
    requires licensees to `* * * enable any State or local government 
    located within the plume exposure pathway EPZ to participate in the 
    licensee's drills when requested by such State or local government.' 
    ''
    
        Issue 2. County, State, and utility emergency preparedness will 
    degrade under a biennial schedule. Mini-drills will not take the place 
    of annual
    
    [[Page 30130]]
    
    exercises as now constituted. Further, States have been encouraging 
    more Federal exercise participation by the Federal Emergency Management 
    Agency (FEMA) and NRC. The proposed change would cut back on the 
    opportunities to test current personnel and train new personnel.
        Response. The Commission disagrees. The rule change does not 
    require ``mini-drills'' to replace annual exercises. The rule change 
    does require that ``the licensee shall take actions necessary to ensure 
    that adequate emergency response capabilities are maintained * * * by 
    conducting drills, including at least one drill involving a combination 
    of some of the principal functional areas of the licensee's onsite 
    emergency response capabilities.'' (10 CFR part 50, appendix E, 
    IV.F.2.b.)
        Additionally, the opportunity to test and train new personnel is 
    provided by requiring that ``Licensees shall enable any State or local 
    Government * * * to participate in the licensee's drills.'' (Id at 
    IV.F.2.e.)
        Issue 3. There is a need for clarity regarding State and local 
    participation in the exercises and drills that are proposed to replace 
    the annual NRC graded exercise. At 60 FR 19002; dated April 14, 1995, 
    licensees are charged to ``enable'' States and local governments to 
    participate in these exercises and drills, but at 60 FR 19006, 
    activating all response facilities (Technical Support Center, (TSC); 
    Operations Support Center (OSC), and the Emergency Operations Facility 
    (EOF)) is not necessary. Because State and local governments coordinate 
    interaction through the EOF and Media Centers, clarification is 
    required. For example, perhaps the utility would be charged with 
    exercising the EOF and Media Centers as a part of at least one exercise 
    and/or drill each year.
        Response. Based on the extensive coordination and cooperation 
    between licensees and State and local governments over the last 15 
    years, the Commission is confident that, if a State or local 
    governmental emergency response agency felt the need to participate in 
    a drill that included interaction at the EOF and Media Centers, the 
    licensee would accommodate the request within the framework of the 
    drills that the licensee conducts throughout the 2-year period between 
    the biennial full participation exercises.
        Issue 4. Rather than eliminating any requirements, it is suggested 
    that each site initially be granted a waiver for ``off-year'' 
    integrated exercises. The waiver would be effective only as long as an 
    acceptable level of emergency response capability is maintained.
        Response. The Commission disagrees. The Commission believes that 
    the proposed rule would accomplish the commenter's objective without 
    the extensive NRC resources that implementing the commenter's 
    suggestion would require.
        Issue 5. The Commission does not appear to have addressed the 
    quantitative question about expected turnover rates that would be 
    important in determining whether biennial exercises could substantially 
    reduce local team skills.
        Response. Please see the response to Issue 1. Additionally, the 
    Commission has always been and continues to be committed to the 
    principle that there exists ``reasonable assurance that adequate 
    protective measures can and will be taken in the event of a 
    radiological emergency.'' If, this finding is jeopardized either at the 
    State or local governmental level, additional training would be 
    warranted and would be provided by participating in the drills the 
    licensee conducts between biennial exercises.
        Issue 6. The Commission has not adequately addressed local 
    Government comments on the importance of regular exercises for 
    improving coordination and communication.
        Response. The Commission did not receive any comments from local 
    governments relating to this petition for rulemaking. Nonetheless, the 
    Commission is confident that if a local Government wished to improve 
    its coordination and communication capabilities, licensees would 
    welcome its participation in one or more of the onsite drills that will 
    be conducted between the biennial exercises.
        Issue 7. The Commission has not addressed the FEMA concern that 
    regular cooperation with offsite teams may play a critical role in 
    their preparedness, which may be especially important in view of the 
    potential role such teams may play as first responders in actual 
    emergencies.
        Response. Prior to publishing the proposed rule, the Commission 
    received FEMA's assurance that their concerns with the petition for 
    rulemaking had been resolved. Nonetheless, regular cooperation between 
    offsite and licensee emergency response teams will be ensured by the 
    requirement that licensees enable any state or local Government within 
    the plume exposure pathway emergency planning zone to participate in 
    the licensee's drills upon request.
    
    Issues Raised by Petitioner
    
        The petitioner characterizes the present requirement as one that is 
    resource intensive but of marginal importance to safety. The petitioner 
    has identified grounds for change for a number of issues associated 
    with the current requirement to conduct an emergency plan exercise 
    annually. The issues presented by the petitioner follow:
        (1) The requirement to conduct an integrated annual exercise is not 
    clearly defined. Therefore, the regulation should be clarified.
        (2) The existing regulation, 10 CFR part 50, appendix E, is 
    inconsistent with other regulations that govern the frequency of 
    offsite response organization integrated exercises (i.e., 44 CFR part 
    350).
        (3) The performance of offsite response organizations during 
    biennial exercises has confirmed that a biennial frequency is 
    sufficient to provide the reasonable assurance finding.
        (4) The existing regulation, 10 CFR 50.54(t), provides for an 
    independent review of the adequacy of the program.
        (5) The existing requirement to conduct an annual exercise is not 
    necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule. A biennial 
    exercise is sufficient to provide an acceptable formal confirmation of 
    capability.
        (6) Reconsideration of the requirement is warranted in light of the 
    completion and implementation of enhanced emergency preparedness 
    facilities, the current level of industry proficiency and performance, 
    and the increased industry sensitivity to emergency preparedness.
        (7) Personnel could be utilized more effectively in their normal 
    professional function rather than by participating in a resource-
    intensive integrated test that only serves to confirm the already 
    existing level of the response capability.
        (8) Emergency planning resources could be utilized more effectively 
    to further the development and maintenance of emergency preparedness 
    activities.
    
    Commission Response
    
        The Commission believes that it is important, in light of public 
    comment, as well as the discussion provided in the petition, to clarify 
    NRC's intent (under the existing rule) that licensees need not conduct 
    annual exercises with scenarios that progress to severe core damage or 
    result in offsite releases. Historically, these scenarios were used in 
    both the biennial full-participation exercise of offsite emergency 
    plans and the annual exercise of the licensee's
    
    [[Page 30131]]
    
    onsite emergency plan; this is no longer necessary for the currently 
    required annual exercises of the licensee's onsite emergency plan. 
    Information Notice (IN) 87-54, ``Emergency Response Exercises,'' was 
    issued to clarify NRC intent in this regard and to provide detailed 
    guidance, specifically on the types of ``off-year'' training activities 
    that licensees can perform during the interval between the biennial 
    full participation exercises to maintain adequate EP response 
    capabilities and to satisfy the rule.
        Some licensees have availed themselves of the flexibility afforded 
    by the IN 87-54 guidance to conduct realistic, interactive ``off-year'' 
    training activities that simulate less severe events, such as a minor 
    fire, loss of electric power, or equipment failure, and focus on the 
    capability of the onsite emergency response organization to diagnose 
    problems and develop actions to successfully mitigate the scenario 
    event. However, as noted in the petition, many licensees continue to 
    employ severe accident scenarios in annual exercises of their onsite 
    emergency plans.
        Accordingly, the Commission is revising Section IV.F.2.b. of 10 CFR 
    part 50, appendix E, to (1) reduce from annual to biennial the 
    frequency of exercising the licensee's onsite emergency plan (which may 
    be included in the biennial full participation exercise specified in 
    IV.F.2.c.) and (2) require licensees to conduct training drills, 
    including at least one drill involving a combination of some of the 
    principal functional areas of the licensee's onsite emergency response 
    capabilities. This drill would be conducted between biennial full 
    participation exercises to ensure that adequate emergency response 
    capabilities are maintained. The principal functional areas of 
    emergency response include activities such as management and 
    coordination of emergency response, accident assessment, protective 
    action decisionmaking, and plant system repair and corrective actions.
        This approach is consistent with a comment from one State that 
    favored the petition for rulemaking but preferred that some guidelines 
    be included in appendix E requiring plant specific internal exercises 
    during the ``off-year'' to ensure plant personnel familiarity with 
    their response plans rather than the vague expectancy that this 
    activity will be done. Furthermore, licensees would continue to enable 
    State and local governments in the plume exposure pathway EPZs to 
    participate in drills in the interval between exercises, thus, 
    preserving their training opportunities.
        The Commission believes that the final rule may result in the 
    reallocation and more effective utilization of resources in some 
    licensees' emergency preparedness (EP) programs as they further the 
    development and maintenance of emergency preparedness capabilities 
    during the ``off-year'' periods. However, it is not clear that these 
    changes will result in significant overall cost savings. The Commission 
    cautions specifically against expectations that the final rule will 
    necessarily result in significant reductions in NRC inspection activity 
    concerning licensees' ``off-year'' EP maintenance activities. Also, 
    licensees will, upon request, submit scenarios for NRC review as may be 
    deemed necessary by NRC in support of future inspections.
    
    Conclusion
    
        Having considered the arguments presented by the petitioner as well 
    as evaluating all public comments received, and based on a further 
    understanding of the issues involved gained from 14 years of experience 
    evaluating licensee emergency preparedness exercises, the Commission 
    concludes that (1) the required frequency for exercising the licensee's 
    onsite emergency plan should be reduced from annual to biennial, (2) 
    the means by which licensees are expected to train and maintain their 
    emergency response capabilities and readiness in the 2-year interval 
    between evaluated exercises should be changed to require licensees to 
    conduct drills, including at least one drill involving a combination of 
    some of the principal functional areas of the licensee's onsite 
    emergency response capabilities, and (3) opportunities for training of 
    State and local Government personnel must be preserved.
        The principal functional areas of emergency response include 
    management and coordination of emergency response, accident assessment, 
    protective action decisionmaking, and plant system repair and 
    corrective actions.
        During the specified drills, activation of all of the licensee's 
    emergency response facilities (Technical Support Center (TSC), 
    Operations Support Center (OSC); and the Emergency Operations Facility 
    (EOF)) would not be necessary. Licensees would have the opportunity to 
    consider accident management strategies, supervised instruction would 
    be permitted, operating staff would have the opportunity to resolve 
    problems (success paths) rather than have controllers intervene, and 
    the drills could focus on onsite training objectives.
        The final rule relieves licensees from the current requirement to 
    conduct a full formal exercise of the licensee's onsite emergency plan 
    annually, and gives licensees the flexibility to choose the activities 
    to be conducted in the 2-year period between biennial full-
    participation exercises in order to maintain their emergency response 
    capabilities. Greater flexibility in the training of the onsite 
    emergency response organization can provide significant benefits to 
    some licensees. For example, licensees can eliminate the practice of 
    developing scenarios that proceed to severe core damage, offsite 
    releases, or to higher emergency classification levels. Licensees will 
    have greater opportunity to conduct realistic emergency response 
    training with supervised instruction that allows the operating staff to 
    consider accident management strategies, diagnose problems, and be 
    given credit for actions that would mitigate scenario events.
        This approach is also responsive to public commenters who expressed 
    concern about a possible decrease in licensee training and readiness in 
    the period between biennial exercises. Under this approach, licensees 
    will still be required to conduct emergency response training and 
    drills of the onsite emergency response organization, as well as 
    provide training opportunities to State and local Government personnel 
    during the interval between biennial exercises. The final rule 
    completes NRC action in response to PRM-50-58. The final rule grants 
    the petitioner's request that the frequency of required onsite 
    emergency response plan exercises be reduced from annual to biennial.
        Additionally, 10 CFR 50.47(a)(1) is being revised in order to 
    correct a typographical error that appeared in the 1993 edition of 
    Title 10, Parts 0 to 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations. In the 1993 
    edition, the word ``protection'' was substituted for ``protective 
    measures'' in 10 CFR 50.47(a)(1). This action corrects this paragraph 
    to read as follows: ``* * * reasonable assurance that adequate 
    protective measures can and will be taken  * * *''
    
    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 10 
    CFR part 51, subpart A, that this rule is not a major Federal action 
    significantly
    
    [[Page 30132]]
    
    affecting the quality of the human environment and therefore, an 
    environmental impact statement is not required. The rule will update 
    and clarify 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. 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.
    
    Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
    
        This final rule does not contain a new or amended information 
    collection requirement subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 
    (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 final 
    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. Single copies of the analysis may be 
    obtained from Michael T. Jamgochian, Office of Nuclear Regulatory 
    Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
    0001; Telephone: (301) 415-6534.
    
    Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
    
        The final rule does not have a significant impact on a substantial 
    number of small entities. The final rule updates and clarifies the 
    emergency planning regulations relating to exercises at nuclear power 
    plants. 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). As required by the 
    Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Commission 
    hereby certifies that the final rule will not have a significant 
    economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Therefore, a 
    regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.
    
    Backfit Analysis
    
        The final rule clarifies the intent of the existing regulation and 
    facilitates greater flexibility in licensees' conduct of ``off-year'' 
    emergency response training activities. This action does not seek to 
    impose any new or increased requirements in this area. The changes 
    permit, but do not require, licensees to change their existing 
    emergency plans and procedures to employ scenarios in ``off-year'' 
    training or drills that do not go to severe core damage or result in 
    offsite exposures. No backfitting is intended or approved in connection 
    with this final rule change.
    
    List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 50
    
        Antitrust, Classified information, Criminal penalties, Fire 
    protection, Intergovernmental relations, Nuclear power plants and 
    reactors, Penalty, Radiation protection, Reactor siting criteria, 
    reporting and record keeping 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. 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).
    
        2. In Sec. 50.47, paragraph (a)(1) is revised to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 50.47  Emergency plans.
    
        (a)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, no 
    initial operating license for a nuclear power reactor will be issued 
    unless a finding is made by the NRC that there is reasonable assurance 
    that adequate protective measures can and will be taken in the event of 
    a radiological emergency. No finding under this section is necessary 
    for issuance of a renewed nuclear power reactor operating license.
    * * * * *
        3. Appendix E to part 50 is amended by revising section IV, F. 
    paragraphs 2.b., and e. to read as follows:
    
    Appendix E--Emergency Planning and Preparedness for Production and 
    Utilization Facilities
    
    IV. Content of Emergency Plans
    F. Training
    * * * * *
        2. * * *
        b. Each licensee at each site shall conduct an exercise of its 
    onsite emergency plan every 2 years. The exercise may be included in 
    the full participation biennial exercise required by paragraph 2.c. of 
    this section. In addition, the licensee shall take actions necessary to 
    ensure that adequate emergency response capabilities are maintained 
    during the interval between biennial exercises by conducting drills, 
    including at least one drill involving a combination of some of the 
    principal functional areas of the licensee's onsite emergency response 
    capabilities. The principal functional areas of emergency response 
    include activities such as management and coordination of emergency 
    response, accident assessment, protective action decisionmaking, and 
    plant system repair and corrective actions. During these drills, 
    activation of all of the licensee's emergency response facilities 
    (Technical Support Center (TSC), Operations Support Center (OSC), and 
    the Emergency Operations Facility (EOF)) would not be necessary, 
    licensees would have the opportunity to consider accident management 
    strategies, supervised instruction would be permitted, operating staff 
    would have the opportunity to resolve problems (success paths) rather 
    than have controllers intervene, and the drills could focus on onsite 
    training objectives.
    * * * * *
        e. Licensees shall enable any State or local Government located 
    within the plume exposure pathway EPZ to participate in the 
    licensee's drills when requested by such State or local Government.
    * * * * *
        Dated at Rockville, MD., this 10th day of June, 1996.
    
        For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
    John C. Hoyle,
    Secretary of the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 96-15155 Filed 6-13-96; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
7/15/1996
Published:
06/14/1996
Department:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Final rule.
Document Number:
96-15155
Dates:
July 15, 1996.
Pages:
30129-30132 (4 pages)
RINs:
3150-AF20: Production and Utilization Facilities; Emergency Planning and Preparedness Exercise Requirements
RIN Links:
https://www.federalregister.gov/regulations/3150-AF20/production-and-utilization-facilities-emergency-planning-and-preparedness-exercise-requirements
PDF File:
96-15155.pdf
CFR: (1)
10 CFR 50.47