[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 191 (Monday, October 4, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53752-53755]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-25716]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-336 and 50-423]
Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, et al.; Millstone Nuclear Power
Station, Unit Nos. 2 and 3; Issuance of Final Director's Decision Under
10 CFR 2.206
Notice is hereby given that the Director of the Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), has
issued a Final Director's Decision with regard to two related
Petitions, both dated April 14, 1999, submitted by Mr. Scott Cullen, on
behalf of Standing for Truth About Radiation, the Nuclear Information
Resource Service, New York State Senator Ken LaValle, and New York
State Assembly members Fred Thiele and Patricia Acampora (the
Petitioners), requesting action under Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, Section 2.206 (10 CFR 2.206). The Petitions pertain to the
Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit Nos. 2 and 3, operated by
Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (NNECO, or the licensee).
In the first Petition, the Petitioners requested that (1) the NRC
immediately suspend NNECO's licenses to operate the Millstone Nuclear
Power Station until there are reasonable assurances that adequate
protective measures for Fishers Island, New York, can and will be taken
in the event of a radiological emergency at Millstone, (2) the
operating licenses should be suspended until such time as ``a range of
protective actions have been developed for the plume exposure pathway
EPZ [emergency planning zone] for emergency workers and the public'',
and (3) these matters be the subject of a public hearing, with full
opportunity for public comment. The basis for the Petitioners' requests
is that the Millstone Nuclear Power Station is not in full compliance
with the law. Specifically, the Petitioners contend that the site is in
violation of 10 CFR 50.54(q) and 10 CFR 50.47 with regard to emergency
planning requirements because Fishers Island, New York, which is
located within the 10-mile EPZ for Millstone, has no functional
emergency plan.
In the second Petition, the Petitioners requested that the NRC
institute a proceeding, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, to suspend the
operating licenses for the Millstone Nuclear Power Station until the
facility is in full compliance with the law. Specifically, the
Petitioners maintain that all of the regulatory listed factors, that
is, ``demography, topography, land characteristics, access routes, and
jurisdictional boundaries,'' were ignored in establishing the 10-mile
plume exposure pathway EPZ (10-mile EPZ) for emergency planning at the
Millstone Nuclear Power Station and, as such, constitute a violation of
10 CFR 50.54(q) and 10 CFR 50.47.
By letter dated May 14, 1999, the NRC informed the Petitioners that
their request for the immediate suspension of the operating licenses
for the Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit Nos. 2 and 3 (first
Petition, Request 1), was denied. In that letter, the NRC also informed
the Petitioners that their request for an informal public hearing
(first Petition, Request 3) was denied. The NRC also told the
Petitioners in the May 14, 1999, letter that their request, in the
second Petition, to initiate a proceeding pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202 to
suspend the operating licenses for Millstone did not satisfy the
criteria for consideration as a 10 CFR 2.206 Petition. The reasons for
these decisions were explained in the May 14, 1999, letter and in the
``Final Director's Decision Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206'' (DD-99-12).
As noted in the May 14, 1999, letter, the NRC stated that the areas
identified in the Petitions related to the adequacy of evacuation and
protective measures planning for Fishers Island, New York, would be
evaluated within a reasonable time. The staff has completed its review
of this area with the assistance of the Federal Emergency Management
Agency. For the reasons given in the Final Director's Decision, DD-99-
12, dated September 28, 1999, Request 2 of the first Petition is
denied.
Additional information is contained in the ``Final Director's
Decision Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206'' (DD-99-12), the complete text of
which follows this notice and which is available for public inspection
at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L
Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public document rooms
located at the Learning Resources Center, Three Rivers Community-
Technical College, 574 New London Turnpike, Norwich, Connecticut, and
at the Waterford Library, 49 Rope Ferry Road, Waterford, Connecticut.
As provided in 10 CFR 2.206(c), a copy of this Final Director's
Decision will be filed with the Secretary of the
[[Page 53753]]
Commission for the Commission's review. This Final Director's Decision
will constitute the final action of the Commission 25 days after its
issuance, unless the Commission, on its own motion, institutes review
of the Decision within that time.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day of September 1999.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Samuel J. Collins,
Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
Final Director's Decision Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206
I. Introduction
By letter dated April 14, 1999, Mr. Scott Cullen, on behalf of
Standing for Truth About Radiation (STAR), the Nuclear Information
Resource Service (NIRS), New York State Senator Ken LaValle, and New
York State Assembly members Fred Thiele and Patricia Acampora (the
Petitioners) submitted two separate but related Petitions pursuant to
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Sec. 2.206 (10 CFR 2.206).
In the first Petition, the Petitioners requested that (1) the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) immediately suspend Northeast
Nuclear Energy Company's (NNECO's) licenses to operate the Millstone
Nuclear Power Station until there are reasonable assurances that
adequate protective measures for Fishers Island, New York, can and will
be taken in the event of a radiological emergency at Millstone; (2) the
operating licenses should be suspended until such time as ``a range of
protective actions have been developed for the plume exposure pathway
EPZ [emergency planning zone] for emergency workers and the public'';
and (3) these matters be the subject of a public hearing, with full
opportunity for public comment. The basis for the Petitioners' requests
is that the Millstone Nuclear Power Station is not in full compliance
with the law. Specifically, the Petitioners contend that the site is in
violation of 10 CFR 50.54(q) and 10 CFR 50.47 with regard to emergency
planning requirements because Fishers Island, New York, which is
located within the 10-mile EPZ for Millstone, has no functional
emergency plan.
In the second Petition, the Petitioners requested that the NRC
institute a proceeding, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, to suspend the
operating licenses for the Millstone Nuclear Power Station until the
facility is in full compliance with the law. Specifically, the
Petitioners maintain that there are no mechanisms by which the
conditional factors of demography, topography, land characteristics,
access routes, and jurisdictional boundaries can be evaluated,
resulting in a complete lack of reasonable assurances that adequate
protective measures can and will be taken on Long Island in the event
of an accident at Millstone. The Petitioners' contend that this
constitutes a violation of 10 CFR 50.54(q) and 10 CFR 50.47.
The NRC informed the Petitioners in a letter to Mr. Cullen dated
May 14, 1999, that their request for immediate suspension of the
operating licenses for the Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit Nos. 2
and 3 (first Petition, Request 1), was denied. The denial was based on
the NRC's finding about the current state of emergency preparedness at
Millstone. The Federal agency with lead responsibility for assessing
the emergency preparedness of State and local governments within the
EPZs surrounding nuclear power plants is the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA). FEMA's responsibilities are defined in NRC's
and FEMA's regulations (10 CFR Part 50 and 44 CFR Part 350,
respectively) and in a memorandum of understanding between the two
agencies (58 FR 47996, September 14, 1993). The NRC evaluates onsite
emergency planning and reviews FEMA's evaluation of offsite emergency
preparedness for the purpose of making findings on the overall state of
emergency preparedness. As stated in 10 CFR 50.54(s)(3):
The NRC will base its finding on a review of the FEMA findings
and determinations as to whether State and local emergency plans are
adequate and capable of being implemented, and on the NRC assessment
as to whether the licensee's emergency plans are adequate and
capable of being implemented.
FEMA has reviewed the State of Connecticut's emergency plan. FEMA
has also reviewed the plans for the nine local communities within the
Millstone plume exposure pathway EPZ, including Fishers Island, New
York. Further, FEMA has evaluated several exercises of these plans.
FEMA originally provided its findings and determinations to the NRC in
October 1984 on the adequacy of offsite planning for Millstone, in
accordance with 44 CFR Part 350 of its regulations. Following the
latest exercise, FEMA confirmed that the offsite radiological emergency
response plans and procedures for the State of Connecticut and the
affected local jurisdictions, including Fishers Island, New York,
specific to the Millstone Nuclear Power Station, can be implemented and
are adequate to provide reasonable assurance that appropriate measures
can be taken to protect the health and safety of the public in the
event of a radiological emergency at Millstone. This was documented in
a December 29, 1997, letter from FEMA to the NRC. The letter forwarded
FEMA's report for the August 21, 1997, full-participation plume pathway
and the October 8-10, 1997, ingestion pathway exercises of the offsite
radiological emergency plans for Millstone. Regarding Fishers Island,
no deficiencies or areas requiring corrective action were identified in
the exercises.
Further, the NRC has found that the licensee's emergency plans are
an adequate basis for an acceptable state of onsite emergency
preparedness in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.47(b) and
Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50 as documented in the NRC's letter to the
licensee dated June 4, 1998.
In the first Petition, the Petitioners raised a concern about the
evacuation of Fishers Island residents to New London, Connecticut, a
direction closer to the site and to an area that may have already been
affected by a radiological emergency at Millstone. Fishers Island is
located about 7\1/2\ miles east/southeast of Millstone. The New London
port is located about 5 miles northeast of Millstone. As stated in the
NRC's May 14, 1999, letter to the Petitioners, the NRC found no prima
facie evidence in the information submitted by the Petitioners that the
protective action of evacuation to New London will not provide an
adequate level of protection to the public. Further, the Petitioners
did not submit any other information that would raise an immediate
concern with the NRC's finding regarding the adequacy of emergency
planning for Millstone. On the basis of a review of FEMA's findings and
determinations on the adequacy of offsite emergency preparedness and on
the NRC's assessment of the adequacy of onsite emergency preparedness,
the NRC determined that (1) there was reasonable assurance that
adequate protective measures can and will be taken in the event of a
radiological emergency and (2) there was insufficient evidence to grant
the Petitioners' request to immediately suspend the operating licenses
for Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit Nos. 2 and 3.
The Petitioners were also told in the May 14, 1999, acknowledgment
letter that their request for an informal public hearing (first
Petition, Request 3) was denied. The denial was based on the NRC's
finding about the current state of emergency preparedness at Millstone.
Specifically, the denial was based on the NRC staff's determination
that the information provided in the Petitions did not identify
deficiencies in offsite
[[Page 53754]]
emergency preparedness that would preclude the implementation of
adequate protective measures for the public in the event of a
radiological emergency at Millstone. Further, the NRC staff determined
that the issues did not rise to the level of significance that
justified conducting an informal hearing on the Petitions.
The Petitioners were told, however, that their Petition did raise
the potential that enhancements could be made to emergency planning for
Millstone that could improve the protection of public health and
safety. Further, the May 14, 1999, acknowledgment letter indicated that
the areas identified in the Petitions related to the adequacy of
evacuation and protective measures planning for Fishers Island would be
evaluated within a reasonable time. Since FEMA has the primary
responsibility for evaluating the emergency preparedness of State and
local governments, the NRC requested the assistance of FEMA, in a
letter dated June 4, 1999, in evaluating the potential enhancements
identified in the Petitions.
The NRC also told the Petitioners in the May 14, 1999, letter that
the request in their second Petition to initiate a proceeding, pursuant
to 10 CFR 2.202, to suspend the operating licenses for Millstone did
not satisfy the criteria for consideration as a 10 CFR 2.206 Petition.
Specifically, the NRC concluded that the referenced factors regarding
the determination of the 10-mile plume exposure pathway EPZ were
properly taken into account. The NRC determined that the second
Petition request did not contain sufficient information to warrant
further action by the NRC to require that the 10-mile EPZ be expanded
to include the eastern end of Long Island, New York.
II. Discussion
The Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.54(q) and (s) governing
emergency planning for operating nuclear power plants require the
submittal and implementation of licensee (onsite) and State and local
government (offsite) emergency plans that conform to the emergency
planning standards in 10 CFR 50.47(b) and the requirements in Appendix
E to 10 CFR Part 50. FEMA is the Federal agency with the lead
responsibility for evaluating offsite radiological emergency response
plans and preparedness.
Fishers Island, New York, is located within the 10-mile plume
exposure pathway EPZ for the Millstone Nuclear Power Station and is
included in the State of Connecticut's Radiological Emergency Response
Plan for Millstone. This plan has been approved by FEMA in accordance
with 44 CFR Part 350 of its regulations. The Connecticut emergency plan
(Revision 1, dated July 1997) contains the following information
regarding Fishers Island:
Fishers Island, located about 7\1/2\ miles east/southeast of
Millstone, is primarily residential with a small year-round
population of about 300 persons and a summer population estimated to
be approximately 3000 persons. On the Independence Day (July 4)
weekend, this transient population may peak at approximately 5000
persons. Fishers Island is a Hamlet, [a] political subdivision of
the Town of Southold, New York, which is in Suffolk County on Long
Island.
Because of the logistics associated with the island's location,
there has been a long-standing operational agreement between
officials of Fishers Island, the Town of Southold, Suffolk County,
the State of New York, and the State of Connecticut. Under this
agreement, the lead responsibility for assessing the initial
radiological impact of an incident on Fishers Island, and providing
assistance with the implementation of any protective actions,
belongs to the State of Connecticut. Officials of Fishers Island and
the Town of Southold, however, have the authority to implement
public protective actions.
The State of New York coordinates the assessment process and
resulting protective action recommendations made by the State of
Connecticut for Fishers Island, maintains communications with
Suffolk County, and provides support to Suffolk County and Fishers
Island, as necessary. The Town of Southold, as well as Suffolk
County, provides back-up communication capabilities and support, and
would lend additional emergency services to the island, if
requested.
The State of Connecticut offers resource support to Fishers
Island in the area of protective actions. Emergency Alerting System
(EAS) announcements for Fishers Island will be made over the
Connecticut Emergency Alerting System. The island relies on the
nearby Town of Groton, Connecticut, for back-up activation of the
public alerting system. Fishers Island residents are designated to
go to the host community of Windham[, Connecticut].
On September 2, 1999, FEMA responded to the NRC's request for
assistance, including a report prepared by the Regional Assistance
Committee (RAC) Chair of FEMA Region I, the FEMA region in which
Millstone is located. The RAC Chair is the leading staff technical
person with radiological emergency preparedness responsibilities in
each FEMA region. FEMA stated that they performed a thorough review and
assessment of the emergency evacuation planning for Fishers Island, New
York. FEMA noted that Fishers Island is included in the State of
Connecticut's approved radiological emergency response plan and that
the Fishers Island plan has been tested several times since it was
approved, most recently during the August 1997 exercise of the State of
Connecticut's plans for Millstone.
FEMA's report stated that in the unlikely event of a nuclear
incident at Millstone, the residents of Fishers Island would be
directed to shelter in place or to evacuate. If directed to evacuate,
the Fishers Island evacuees would be moved by ferry to New London, then
transported by bus to the host community in Windham, Connecticut. New
London was chosen as the ferry's destination because the Fishers Island
Ferry District, which would provide service in the event of an
evacuation, is based on Fishers Island and normal everyday traffic
travels between New London and Fishers Island. Should an incident at
Millstone require the evacuation of Fishers Island, residents would
evacuate the island using the regular ferry service, and would be
transported to the host community in Windham, Connecticut, by way of
the Port of New London. Should New London not be available to the
Fisher Island evacuees (i.e., if radiological conditions have resulted
in its evacuation), then the Connecticut Emergency Management Director
and the State of New York Emergency Management Office would jointly
choose to direct the ferry to another port, such as Stonington,
Connecticut, located northeast of Fishers Island and east of New
London. FEMA's report noted that the protective actions of sheltering
and evacuation are the same two protective actions that appear in all
other Connecticut emergency response plans.
With regard to the Petitioners' specific concern about the August
8, 1997, Millstone exercise, FEMA's report stated that the postulated
condition of the Millstone plant during the exercise was such that the
Governor of Connecticut ordered residents in all EPZ communities to
evacuate. With the postulated conditions, the protective action for
Fishers Island was to evacuate through New London. The Petitioners were
concerned that this was a direction that brought the evacuees closer to
the plant. FEMA indicated that the Fishers Island evacuees would not
have been at risk during the conduct of this protective action because
the plume, had it been real, was traveling in a westerly direction,
away from New London, according to the exercise scenario. As such,
during this scenario, the evacuees could pass through New London
without the threat of exposure to radiation. As discussed previously,
should New London not be available
[[Page 53755]]
(for example, the plume has passed over New London and adverse
radiological conditions exist), the ferry would be directed to another
port.
FEMA's report indicates that certain enhancements to the Fishers
Island plan are being considered and its September 2, 1999, report
summarized some of the ongoing emergency planning activities. In July
1998, Northeast Utilities (the licensee), the Connecticut Office of
Emergency Management, and FEMA Regions I and II, participated in a
demonstration of a ferry run from Fishers Island to Stonington,
Connecticut. The objective of this demonstration was to determine the
feasibility of having the ferry pick up people from Fishers Island and
take them to Stonington, which is located about 7 miles northeast of
Fishers Island. The plan and preparations for adding the Port of
Stonington, Connecticut, as a receiving port for Fishers Island
evacuees is projected to be completed by the end of 1999. Windham,
Connecticut, will continue to be used as the host community for Fishers
Island residents. FEMA will review changes to the offsite emergency
plans to ensure that the plans are adequate and capable of being
implemented.
FEMA's report stated that an agreement exists between the
Connecticut Office of Emergency Management and the Fishers Island Ferry
District for the exclusive use of their ferries in the event of an
incident at Millstone. Further, FEMA indicated that negotiations are in
progress for an agreement between the Connecticut Office of Emergency
Management and the Cross Sound Ferry Company for the use of five of
their ferries in the event of an emergency at Millstone.
FEMA's report also noted that in September 1998, a meeting between
Connecticut and New York State emergency management agencies was held
in Hartford, Connecticut, to discuss offsite emergency preparedness for
Millstone and the degree of coordination and communications. At the
meeting were representatives of the Connecticut Office of Emergency
Management, the New York State Emergency Management Office, Northeast
Utilities, FEMA, and the NRC. Further, in October 1998, the Connecticut
Office of Emergency Management and the New York State Emergency
Management Office met to discuss other ways of improving communications
in making appropriate protective action decisions for Fishers Island.
On June 22, 1999, the Connecticut Office of Emergency Management
held its quarterly emergency management director's meeting on Fishers
Island to discuss emergency response issues concerning Millstone. The
emergency management directors from the Millstone EPZ communities
attended this meeting, including those from Fishers Island, the Town of
Southold, New London, Stonington, and the host community of Windham,
Connecticut. This meeting gave these key emergency management directors
an opportunity to communicate directly.
In its September 2, 1999, letter to the NRC, FEMA stated that on
the basis of its assessment of emergency planning for the Millstone
Nuclear Power Station, there is continued reasonable assurance that
adequate protective measures can be taken to protect the public health
and safety in the event of a radiological emergency at Millstone.
III. Conclusion
After reviewing FEMA's findings and determinations on the adequacy
of offsite emergency preparedness and the NRC's assessment of onsite
emergency preparedness, the NRC has determined that there is continued
reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be
taken in the event of a radiological emergency at Millstone. In
addition, based on FEMA's findings on the adequacy of emergency
preparedness for Fishers Island, the NRC concludes that the Fishers
Island emergency plan is adequate and there is reasonable assurance
that it can be implemented. Further, the NRC recognizes that potential
enhancements are being implemented to improve the protection of the
health and safety of the population on Fishers Island. As a result of
these findings by FEMA and the NRC, the NRC has determined that the
Petitioner's request to suspend the operating licenses for Millstone
Unit Nos. 2 and 3 until a range of protective actions are developed for
the 10-mile EPZ (first Petition, Request 2) is denied.
A Copy of this Final Director's Decision will be placed in the
Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street,
NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public document rooms located at
the Learning Resources Center, Three Rivers Community-Technical
College, 574 New London Turnpike, Norwich, Connecticut, and at the
Waterford Library, 49 Rope Ferry Road, Waterford, Connecticut.
As provided in 10 CFR 2.206(c), a copy of this Final Director's
Decision will be filed with the Secretary of the Commission for the
Commission's review. This Final Director's Decision will constitute the
final action of the Commission 25 days after its issuance, unless the
Commission, on its own motion, institutes review of the Decision within
that time.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day of September 1999.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Samuel J. Collins,
Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 99-25716 Filed 10-1-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
