[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 146 (Monday, July 31, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39026-39028]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-18744]



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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-361 and 50-362]


Southern California Edison Company, et al.; San Onofre Nuclear 
Generating Station, Units 2 and 3; Issuance of Director's Decision 
Under 10 CFR 2.206

    Notice is hereby given that the Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor 
Regulation, has acted on a Petition for action under 10CFR 2.206 
received from Richard M. Dean, dated September 19, 1994, as 
supplemented on December 2 and December 7, 1994, for the San Onofre 
Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS), Units 2 and 3.
    In a letter dated September 19, 1994, the Petitioner requested that 
the NRC shut down the SONGS facility based upon gross negligence by 
Southern California Edison Company in not having an escape plan. The 
Petitioner asserted as a basis for this request that the closure of the 
Pacific Coast Highway at the Dana Point/San Clemente border (due to a 
landslide on January 16, 1993) invalidates the emergency evacuation 
plans for the residents of San Clemente. In letters dated December 2 
and December 7, 1994, the Petitioner again requested the NRC to close 
the SONGS facility. The Petitioner asserted as a basis for this request 
that the recent financial losses incurred by Orange County called into 
question the County's ability to effectively participate in emergency 
evacuation plans in the event of a emergency at SONGS. Since these 
concerns were closely related to those expressed in the Petitioner's 
September 19, 1994, petition, they were treated as supplements to this 
petition.
    The Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation has 
determined that the request should be denied for the reasons stated in 
the ``Director's Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206'' (DD-95-14), 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 20555, and at the Local 
Public Document Room located at the University of California Main 
Library, P.O. Box 19577, Irvine, California 92713.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of July 1995.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William T. Russell,
Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
Appendix to Director's Decision Under 2.206

I. Introduction

    By Petition dated September 19, 1994, Mr. Richard M. Dean 
(Petitioner) requested that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) 
take action with regard to San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station 
(SONGS). The Petitioner requested that the NRC shut down the SONGS 
facility based upon gross negligence by Southern California Edison 
Company in not having an escape plan. The Petitioner asserted as a 
basis for this request that the closure of the Pacific Coast Highway 
(PCH) at the Dana Point/San Clemente border (due to a landslide on 
January 16, 1993) invalidates the emergency evacuation plans for the 
residents of San Clemente. Notice of receipt of the Petition 
indicating that a final decision with respect to the requested 
action would be forthcoming at a later date was 

[[Page 39027]]
published in the Federal Register on November 9, 1994 (59 FR 55900).
    The Petitioner, in letters dated December 2 and December 7, 
1994, again requested the NRC to close the SONGS facility. The 
Petitioner asserted as a basis for this request that the recent 
financial losses incurred by Orange County called into question the 
county's ability to effectively participate in emergency evacuation 
plans in the event of an emergency at SONGS. Since these concerns 
were closely related to those expressed in the Petitioner's 
September 19, 1994, Petition, they were treated as supplements to 
that Petition.
    Because the Petition involves matters related to offsite 
emergency planning, the NRC requested the assistance of the Federal 
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in responding to the issues 
raised by the Petition. By Presidential directive, FEMA has been 
assigned the responsibility for assessing the adequacy of offsite 
emergency plans for the area surrounding a nuclear plant. The NRC is 
responsible for assessing the adequacy of onsite emergency plans and 
has the final licensing authority. FEMA responded to NRC's request 
for assistance by letter dated March 22, 1995.

II. Discussion

    Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 50, 
Sec. 50.54(q), states in part that ``A licensee authorized to posses 
and operate a nuclear power reactor shall follow and maintain in 
effect emergency plans which meet the standards in Sec. 50.47(b).'' 
Section 50.54(s)(1) states in part that ``Each licensee who is 
authorized to possess and/or operate a nuclear power reactor shall 
submit to NRC within 60 days of the effective date of this amendment 
the radiological emergency response plans of State and local 
governmental entities in the United States that are wholly or 
partially within a plume exposure pathway EPZ, as well as the plans 
of State governments wholly or partially within an ingestion pathway 
EPZ.'' Section 50.47(a)(1) states in part that ``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 protection can and will be taken in the event of a 
radiological emergency.'' Section 50.47(a)(2) further states in 
part, ``The NRC will base its findings on a review of the Federal 
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) findings and determinations as to 
whether State and local emergency plans are adequate and whether 
there is reasonable assurance that they can be implemented.'' The 
review and approval of State and local radiological emergency plans 
and preparedness by FEMA are performed under the provisions of 44 
CFR Part 350.
    Officials from the State of California, Orange County, the City 
of San Clemente, and other jurisdictions in the emergency planning 
zone (EPZ) for the SONGS facility have participated in the 
development of the Radiological Emergency Preparedness (REP) plans 
to be implemented in the event of an incident at the facility. These 
REP plans have been evaluated in detail during each of the biennial 
REP exercises that began in May 1981; findings of these exercises 
have been reported to the NRC by FEMA. During these biennial 
exercises, evacuation route impediments, such as landslides, are 
simulated to test the capability of the offsite response 
organization to deal with such a contingency. The California State 
and local officials have continued to meet such challenges 
successfully during these biennial REP exercises. The most recent 
exercise was conducted in September 1993. As documented in (1) the 
October 13, 1993, letter from the NRC to Southern California Edison 
Company, forwarding the staff's inspection report of the September 
1993 exercise, and (2) the March 27, 1995, letter from FEMA to the 
NRC, forwarding its report on the exercise, the offsite radiological 
emergency response plans and preparedness for the State of 
California and the affected local jurisdictions can be implemented 
and are adequate to provide reasonable assurance that appropriate 
measures can be taken off site to protect the health and safety of 
the public in the event of a radiological emergency at the site.
    The Petitioner's assertion that with the closure of the PCH, 
Interstate 5 is the only route out of San Clemente is incorrect. The 
SONGS EPZ has a total of 10 sectors for evacuation purposes. Three 
of these sectors comprise to the City of San Clemente. The portion 
of the PCH affected by the landslide only affects the evacuation of 
one sector, Sector 3, of the City of San Clemente.
    The landslide on January 16, 1993, closed the PCH at the San 
Clemente and Dana Point border. More landslides occurred in February 
1993. However, an alternate route was established around the 
landslide area by local officials to act as a substitute evacuation 
route while the PCH was being repaired. The PCH had been scheduled 
to reopen in January 1995. However, in January 1995, the entire area 
received extremely heavy rainfall, causing further delays in the 
reopening of this portion of the PCH. The PCH was officially 
reopened on April 5, 1995. During reconstruction activities, the PCH 
was not open to the general public. However, two lanes were open for 
construction traffic and they could have been used to supplement the 
alternate route, if needed, as a means for evacuating the area. As 
stated by FEMA in its letter dated March 22, 1995, since an 
alternate evacuation route was established during the period when 
the PCH was closed to normal traffic and since the PCH was available 
for emergency use, the safe evacuation of the citizens of San 
Clemente was not compromised.
    With respect to the Petitioner's concerns regarding the ability 
of Orange County to effectively participate in emergency evacuation 
activities considering the County's current financial difficulties, 
FEMA concludes that Orange County is meeting its obligations in this 
matter. According to FEMA's letter dated March 22, 1995, Orange 
County officials are aware that the current financial situation 
presents a major challenge in restructuring and prioritizing 
services to meet their objectives and mandates within their 
available resources. However, the Board of Supervisors recognizes 
that the primary mission of the County or of the local County 
government is the protection of health, safety, and welfare of the 
citizens and visitors to the County. During this financial crisis, 
the Board has repeatedly reiterated and publicly confirmed that 
these services are the highest priority for all County agencies and 
departments, including those services provided to contract cities 
such as San Clemente. In addition, a representative of the County is 
an active participant on the SONGS Interjurisdictional Planning 
Committee (IPC), which meets on a formal basis with officials of 
SONGS, the affected cities, the Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base, 
the State Department of Parks and Recreation, the Capistrano Unified 
School District, San Diego County, and Federal and State emergency 
organizations to coordinate their nuclear power plant plans, 
preparedness, and procedures for emergency response to an emergency 
or incident at the SONGS site. The IPC also coordinates the 
multiagency planning, training, and drills for multihazard emergency 
response. The IPC representatives meet at least monthly to ensure 
their planning and preparedness measures are thoroughly coordinated 
and current. Accordingly, as stated by FEMA in its letter dated 
March 22, 1995, Orange County's financial difficulties are not 
preventing it from meeting its emergency evacuation responsibility.
III. Conclusion

    The institution of proceedings pursuant to section 2.206 is 
appropriate only if substantial health and safety issues have been 
raised. See Consolidated Edison Co. of New York (Indian Point, Units 
1, 2, and 3), CLI-75-8, 2 NRC 173, 175 (1975); Washington Public 
Power Supply System (WPPSS Nuclear Project No. 2), DD-84-7, 19 NRC 
899, 924 (1984). This is the standard that has been applied to the 
concerns raised by the Petitioner to determine whether the action 
requested by the Petitioner is warranted. With regard to the request 
made by the Petitioner to shut down the SONGS facility, I find no 
basis for taking this action. The respective local jurisdictions 
have maintained their emergency plans in effect and continue to 
monitor them on a regular basis to ensure they remain current and 
coordinated. Appropriate evacuation routes are available. Local 
officials are aware of their resource limitations and have focused 
resources to ensure that the health, safety, and welfare of the 
citizens are of priority. FEMA has repeatedly determined that 
offsite emergency response plans and preparedness can be implemented 
and are adequate to provide reasonable assurance that appropriate 
measures can be taken offsite to protect the health and safety of 
the public in the event of a radiological emergency at the SONGS 
facility. On the basis of FEMA's findings, the NRC continues to find 
that there is reasonable assurance that adequate protection can and 
will be taken in the event of a radiological emergency at the SONGS 
facility. For the reasons discussed above, no basis exists for 
taking any action in response to the Petition as no substantial 
health or safety issues have been raised by the Petition. 
Accordingly, the Petitioner's request for action pursuant to Section 
2.206 is denied.
    A copy of this Decision will be filed with the Secretary of the 
Commission for the 

[[Page 39028]]
Commission to review in accordance with 10 CFR 2.206(c) of the 
Commission's regulations. As provided by this regulation, the 
Decision will constitute the final action of the Commission 25 days 
after issuance, unless the Commission, on its own motion, institutes 
a review of the Decision within that time.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24 day of July 1995.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William T. Russell,
Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-18744 Filed 7-28-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M