[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 242 (Monday, December 19, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 75085-75090]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-7518]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 242 / Monday, December 19, 2005 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 75085]]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 50
[Docket No. PRM-50-79]
Mr. Lawrence T. Christian, et al.; Denial of Petition for
Rulemaking
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Denial of petition for rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is denying a petition
for rulemaking submitted by Mr. Lawrence T. Christian and 3,000 co-
signers on September 4, 2002. The petition was docketed by the NRC on
September 23, 2002, and has been assigned Docket No. PRM-50-79. The
petition requests that the NRC amend its regulations regarding offsite
state and local government emergency plans for nuclear power plants to
ensure that all daycare centers and nursery schools in the vicinity of
nuclear power facilities are properly protected in the event of a
radiological emergency.
ADDRESSES: Publicly available documents related to this petition,
including the petition for rulemaking, public comments received, and
the NRC's letter of denial to the petitioner, may be viewed
electronically on public computers in the NRC's Public Document Room
(PDR), 01 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a
fee. Selected documents, including comments, may be viewed and
downloaded electronically via the NRC rulemaking Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov.
Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC after
November 1, 1999, are also available electronically at the NRC's
Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
From this site, the public can gain entry into the NRC's Agencywide
Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and
image files of NRC's public documents. If you do not have access to
ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in
ADAMS, contact the PDR reference staff at (800) 387-4209, (301) 415-
4737 or by e-mail to [email protected].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael T. Jamgochian, Office of
Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-3224, e-mail
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
In December 1979, the President directed the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA), to lead state and local emergency planning
and preparedness activities with respect to jurisdictions in proximity
to nuclear reactors. FEMA has responsibilities under Executive Order
12148, issued on July 15, 1979, to establish federal policies and to
coordinate civil emergency planning within emergency preparedness
programs. Consequently, FEMA is the lead authority concerning the
direction, recommendations, and determinations with regard to offsite
state and local government radiological emergency planning efforts
necessary for the public health and safety. FEMA sends its findings to
the NRC for final determinations. FEMA implemented Executive Order
12148 in its regulations outlined in 44 CFR Part 350. Within the
framework of authority created by Executive Order 12148, FEMA entered
into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) (58 FR 47966, September 9,
1993) with the NRC to provide acceptance criteria for and
determinations as to whether state and local government emergency plans
are adequate and capable of being implemented to ensure public health
and safety. FEMA's regulations were further amplified by FEMA Guidance
Memorandum (GM) EV-2, ``Protective Actions for School Children'' and
FEMA-REP-14, ``Radiological Emergency Preparedness Exercise Manual.''
The Commission's emergency planning regulations for nuclear power
reactors are contained in 10 CFR Part 50, specifically Sec. 50.33(g),
50.47, 50.54 and Appendix E. As stated in 10 CFR 50.47(a)(1), in order
to issue an initial operating license, the NRC must make a finding
``that there is reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures
can and will be taken in the event of a radiological emergency'' to
protect the public health and safety. An acceptable way of meeting the
NRC's emergency planning requirements is contained in Regulatory Guide
(RG) 1.101, Rev. 4, ``Emergency Planning and Preparedness for Nuclear
Power Reactors'' (ADAMS Accession No. ML032020276). This guidance
document endorses NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1, ``Criteria for
Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and
Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants'' (ML040420012;
Addenda: ML021050240), an NRC and FEMA joint guidance document intended
to provide nuclear facility operators and federal, state, and local
government agencies with acceptance criteria and guidance on the
creation and review of radiological emergency plans. Together, RG
1.101, Rev. 4, and NUREG-0654, Rev. 1, provide guidance to licensees
and applicants on methods acceptable to the NRC staff for complying
with the Commission's regulations for emergency response plans and
preparedness at nuclear power reactors.
Emergency plans for all nuclear power reactors are required under
Part 50, as amplified by NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1 and applicable FEMA
guidance documents, to have specific provisions for all ``special
facility populations,'' which refers not only to pre-schools, nursery
schools, and daycare centers, but all kindergarten through twelfth
grade (K-12) students, nursing homes, group homes for physically or
mentally challenged individuals and those who are mobility challenged,
as well as those in correctional facilities. FEMA GM 24, ``Radiological
Emergency Preparedness for Handicapped Persons,'' dated April 5, 1984,
and GM EV-2, ``Protective Actions for School Children,'' dated November
13, 1986, provide further guidance. These specific plans shall, at a
minimum:
Identify the population of such facilities;
Determine and provide protective actions for these
populations;
Establish and maintain notification methods for these
facilities; and
[[Page 75086]]
Determine and provide for transportation and relocation.
All plans are finalized and submitted to FEMA for review. The plans
are tested in a biennial emergency preparedness exercise conducted for
each nuclear power station. If plans or procedures are found to be
inadequate, they must be corrected.
Availability of Documents
The NRC is making the documents identified below available to
interested persons through one or more of the following:
Public Document Room (PDR)
The NRC Public Document Room is located at 11555 Rockville Pike,
Public File Area O-1 F21, Rockville, Maryland. Copies of publicly
available NRC documents related to this petition can be viewed
electronically on public computers in the PDR. The PDR reproduction
contractor will make copies of documents for a fee.
Rulemaking Web Site (Web)
The NRC's interactive rulemaking Web site is located at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov. Selected documents may be viewed and downloaded
electronically via this Web site.
The NRC's public Electronic Reading Room (ADAMS) is located at
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Through this site, the public
can gain access to the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and Management
System, which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents.
NRC Staff Contact (NRC Staff)
For single copies of documents not available in an electronic file
format, contact Michael T. Jamgochian, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001, telephone (301) 415-3224, e-mail [email protected].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NRC
Document PDR Web ADAMS staff
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petition for Rulemaking (PRM-50-79)........... X X ML023110466
Federal Register Notice--Receipt of Petition X X ML023050008
for Rulemaking (67 FR 66588; Nov. 1, 2002).
Federal Register Notice--Receipt of Petition X X ML040770516
for Rulemaking; Correction (67 FR 67800; Nov.
7, 2002).
Public Comments, Part 1 of 2.................. X X ML040770480
Public Comments, Part 2 of 2.................. X X ML040770544
Additional Public Comments.................... ....... X ML041910013
Letter of Denial to the Petitioners........... X X ML053260004
RG 1.101, Rev. 4, Emergency Planning and X ....... ML032020276
Preparedness for Nuclear Power Reactors (July
2003).
NUREG-0654/FEMA REP-1, Rev. 1 Criteria for X ....... ML040420012
Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological
Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in
Support of Nuclear Power Plants (November
1980).
NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1 Addenda (March X ....... ML021050240
2002).
Executive Order 12148, Federal Emergency X
Management (July 20, 1979).
MOU Between FEMA and NRC Relating to X
Radiological Emergency Planning and
Preparedness (June 17, 1993).
FEMA GM 24, Radiological Emergency X
Preparedness for Handicapped Persons (April
5, 1984).
FEMA-REP-14, Radiological Emergency X
Preparedness Exercise Manual (September 1991).
FEMA GM EV-2, Protective Actions for School X
Children (November 13, 1986).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Petitioners' Request
This petition for rulemaking (PRM-50-79) generally requests that
the NRC establish new rules requiring that emergency planning for
daycare centers and nursery schools located in the Emergency Planning
Zone (EPZ) be included in the state and local government offsite
emergency plans of all NRC nuclear power facility licensees. More
specifically, the petition requests that the NRC amend its regulations
to ensure that all children attending daycare centers and nursery
schools within the EPZ are:
A. Assigned to designated relocation centers established safely
outside of the EPZ.
B. Provided with designated transportation to a relocation center
in the event of an emergency evacuation.
C. Transported in approved child-safety seats that meet state and
federal laws as they pertain to the transportation of children and
infants under 50 pounds in weight or 4 feet 9 inches in height.
The petitioners also request that the following be mandated by NRC
regulations:
D. The creation and maintenance of working rosters of emergency bus
drivers and back-up drivers for daycare center and nursery school
evacuation vehicles, and the establishment of a system for notifying
these individuals in the event of a radiological emergency. These
rosters should be regularly checked and updated, with a designated
back-up driver listed for each vehicle and route.
E. Notification of emergency management officials by individual
preschools as to the details of each institution's radiological
emergency plan.
F. Annual site inspections of daycare centers and nursery schools
within the evacuation zone by emergency management officials.
G. Participation of daycare centers and nursery schools within the
EPZ in radiological emergency preparedness exercises designed to
determine each institution's state of readiness.
H. Creation of identification cards, school attendance lists, and
fingerprint records for all children who are to be transported to a
relocation center, to ensure no child is left behind or is unable, due
to age, to communicate his or her contact information to emergency
workers.
I. Development by emergency management officials of educational
materials for parents, informing them what will happen to their
children in case of a radiological emergency, and where their children
can be picked up after an emergency evacuation.
J. Stocking of potassium iodide (KI) pills and appropriate
educational materials at all daycare centers and nursery schools within
the EPZ.
K. Radiological emergency preparedness training for all daycare
center and nursery school employees within the EPZ.
L. Listing of designated relocation centers for daycare centers and
nursery schools in area phone directories, so that parents can quickly
and easily find where their children will be sent in case of a
radiological emergency.
[[Page 75087]]
M. Establishment of toll-free or 911-type telephone lines to
provide information about radiological emergency plans and procedures
for daycare centers and nursery schools within the EPZ.
N. Creation of written scripts for use by the local Emergency Alert
System (EAS) that include information about evacuation plans and
designated relocation centers for daycare centers and nursery schools.
Public Comments
The NRC received 55 public comment letters relating to this
petition. Twenty-four letters supported granting the petition (mostly
from citizens including three letters with 410 signatures), while 30
letters requested that the petition be denied. Those letters that
supported denial of the petition were primarily from state and local
governmental agencies, FEMA, and licensees. In addition, the NRC
received one letter that discussed KI but did not take a position on
the petition.
More specifically;
24 Letters supporting the granting of the petition:
13 Comment letters from citizens supporting the granting of the
petition.
1 Comment letter from a citizens group supporting the granting of
the petition.
4 Comment letters from local governmental agencies or officials
supporting the petition.
3 Comment letters with 410 signatures supporting the petition.
1 Letter from the petitioner supporting the petition. The
petitioner also ``suggests a federal model that mirrors the Illinois,
Massachusetts, Michigan, or Nebraska* * *'' emergency plans for daycare
centers and nursery schools, even though those state plans only meet
about 30 percent of the elements requested by the petitioner, while
meeting FEMA guidance.
1 Letter from eight local governments that agreed with the concepts
of the petition but had reservations about some of the specific
requests of the petitioners.
1 Letter from the Governor of Pennsylvania withdrawing an earlier
submitted letter, and supporting the granting of the petition.
30 Letters asking the Commission to deny the petition:
4 Letters from two local governments located near the petitioners,
and from two citizens to deny the petition but suggested that the
daycare centers and nursery schools should be responsible for
developing their own emergency plans.
8 Letters from local governmental agencies to deny the petition for
rulemaking because they felt that current regulations are adequate.
12 Letters from State governments including two letters from FEMA
(Headquarters and Region 7) to deny the petition, based on the opinion
that the petitioners' requests are adequately addressed in current
regulations and guidance.
4 Letters from licensees or companies that own nuclear utilities,
to deny the petition.
1 Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) letter to deny the petition.
1 Letter representing six licensees to deny the petition.
1 Letter that discusses KI, but does not take a position on the
petition.
NRC Evaluation
The Commission has reviewed each of the petitioners' requests and
provides the following analysis:
1. The petitioners' first and more general request is that daycare
centers and nursery schools, located within the 10-mile EPZ, be
included in state and local government offsite emergency planning.
NRC Review: The current regulatory structure already requires that
daycare centers and nursery schools be included in the offsite
emergency planning for nuclear power plants. Consequently, no revision
to 10 CFR Part 50 is necessary. The Commission's emergency planning
regulations, in 10 CFR 50.47, require the NRC to make a finding, before
issuing an initial operating license, that there is ``reasonable
assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be taken in
the event of a radiological emergency.'' Implicit in this regulation is
the requirement that offsite emergency plans be protective of all
members of the public, including children attending daycare centers and
nursery schools, within the 10-mile EPZ. Joint NRC and FEMA
implementing guidance, NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1, states that
emergency plans must provide specific means for ``protecting those
persons whose mobility may be impaired due to such factors as
institutional or other confinement.'' NUREG-0654, Section II.J. and
Appendix 4, as well as, FEMA GM 24, ``Radiological Emergency
Preparedness for Handicapped Persons,'' dated April 5, 1984, also
provide guidance. Children in daycare centers and nursery schools are
included in the category of persons needing special protection. FEMA GM
EV-2, ``Protective Actions for School Children,'' was issued to provide
guidance to assist federal officials in evaluating adequacy of state
and local government offsite emergency plans and preparedness for
protecting school children during a radiological emergency. It
specifically addresses licensed and government supported pre-schools
and daycare centers, but has been implemented to include all daycare
centers and nursery schools with more than 10 children.
FEMA is the federal agency responsible for making findings and
determinations as to whether state and local emergency plans are
adequate and whether there is reasonable assurance that they can be
implemented. FEMA uses the guidance documents discussed above to make
such findings. The NRC makes its finding as to whether the emergency
plans provide a reasonable assurance that adequate protective measures
can and will be taken under 10 CFR 50.47(a)(2). The NRC's findings are
based upon FEMA findings and determinations in this area. The NRC would
not grant an initial operating license if FEMA found that state and
local government emergency plans did not adequately address daycare
centers and nursery schools. In accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(s)(2)(ii),
if significant deficiencies in a licensee's emergency plan were
discovered after its operating license was issued, and those
deficiencies were not corrected within four months of discovery (or a
plan for correction was not in place), the Commission would determine
whether the reactor should be shut down until the deficiencies are
remedied or whether some other enforcement action would be appropriate.
Based on this information and considering that the existing regulatory
structure already has requirements addressing the facilities of concern
to the petitioners, no revision to 10 CFR Part 50 is necessary in
response to the petitioners' general request.
The more specific elements of the petition follow:
A. Require that children attending daycare centers and nursery
schools be assigned to designated relocation centers established safely
outside the EPZ.
NRC Review: The petitioners' requested revision to 10 CFR Part 50
is not needed because the requested action is already covered by FEMA
guidance documents. FEMA's GM EV-2 (pp. 2 and 4) specifies that state
and local government offsite emergency plans should designate
relocation centers outside of the 10-mile EPZ for all schools,
including daycare centers and nursery schools. FEMA assesses offsite
emergency plans using this guidance when making a finding that a plan
adequately protects the public. Under
[[Page 75088]]
the MOU between FEMA and the NRC, the NRC defers to FEMA's expertise in
offsite emergency plan requirements and assessments.
B. Require that children attending daycare centers and nursery
schools be provided with designated transportation to relocation
centers in the event of an emergency evacuation.
NRC Review: As previously discussed, FEMA is the federal agency
responsible for making findings and determinations as to whether state
and local emergency plans are adequate. FEMA's GM EV-2 (pp. 2 and 4)
specifies that the state and local government offsite emergency plans
should designate transportation to relocation centers outside of the
10-mile EPZ for all schools including daycare centers and nursery
schools. FEMA reviews emergency plans to ensure that this provision is
addressed. Consequently, a revision to 10 CFR Part 50 is not needed.
C. Require that children attending daycare centers and nursery
schools be transported in approved child-safety seats that meet state
and federal laws as they pertain to the transportation of children and
infants under 50 pounds in weight or 4 feet 9 inches in height.
NRC Review: Requiring seat belts or child safety seats on school
buses that may be used for evacuating schools is outside NRC statutory
authority. Such a requirement would instead need to be promulgated by
the Department of Transportation or appropriate state authorities.
D. Require the creation and maintenance of working rosters of
emergency bus drivers and back-up drivers for daycare center and
nursery school evacuation vehicles, and the establishment of a system
for notifying these individuals in the event of a radiological
emergency. These rosters should be regularly checked and updated, with
a designated back-up driver listed for each vehicle and route.
NRC Review: The petitioners' requested revision to 10 CFR Part 50
is not needed because NRC considers the existing requirements and
guidance for agreements between bus drivers and local authorities to be
similar to the requested detailed driver lists and back-up driver
requirements. FEMA's GM EV-2 (p. 10) specifies that bus drivers trained
in basic radiological preparedness and dosimetry are to be provided for
the evacuation of daycare centers and nursery schools. FEMA's GM EV-2
(p. 10) also specifies that agreements between bus drivers and local
authorities are to be established for the drivers to provide their
services in an emergency. These agreements eliminate the need for a
roster. Under the MOU between FEMA and the NRC, the NRC defers to
FEMA's expertise in state and local emergency plan requirements and
assessments. NRC has made FEMA aware of the petitioners' concerns, and
FEMA recently completed an emergency preparedness exercise at TMI that
included issues related to transportation of students attending daycare
centers and nursery schools. FEMA's final report on this exercise was
issued on August 4, 2005. FEMA identified no deficiencies in this area.
E. Require notification of emergency management officials by
individual preschools as to the details of each institution's
radiological emergency plan.
NRC Review: NRC considers that current NRC and FEMA requirements
and guidance are adequate. Although the petition requested that daycare
centers and nursery schools have the responsibility for conveying their
emergency planning information to government officials, under current
requirements, this responsibility resides with state and local
government officials. FEMA's GM EV-2 (p. 5) specifies that the state
and local government officials should take the initiative to identify
and contact all daycare centers and nursery schools within the
designated 10-mile plume exposure pathway EPZ to assure that there
exists appropriate planning for protecting the health and safety of
their students from a commercial nuclear power plant accident.
NRC and FEMA expect local governments to assume responsibility for
the emergency planning and preparedness for all schools within their
districted area, and to work closely with school officials to
coordinate planning efforts. FEMA's GM EV-2 (pp. 5 and 6) specifies
that local governments should also ensure that the emergency planning
undertaken by schools is integrated within the larger state and local
government offsite emergency management framework for the particular
nuclear power plant site.
FEMA's GM EV-2 ( pp. 5 and 6) specifies that evacuation planning is
to include a separate evacuation plan for all of the schools in each
school system. School officials, with the assistance of state and local
government offsite authorities, should document in the plan the basis
for determining the proper protective action (e.g., evacuation, early
preparatory measures, early evacuation, sheltering, early dismissal or
combination) including:
Identification of offsite organization and state and local
government officials responsible for both planning and effecting the
protective action.
Institution-specific information:
--Name and location of school;
--Type of school and age grouping (e.g., public elementary school,
grades kindergarten through sixth);
--Total population (students, faculty, and other employees);
--Means for implementing protective actions;
--Specific resources allocated for transportation, including supporting
letters of agreement if resources are provided from external sources;
and
--Name and location of relocation center(s) and transport route(s), if
applicable.
If parts of the institution-specific information apply to
many or all schools, then the information may be presented generically.
Time frames for implementing the protective actions.
Means for alerting and notifying appropriate persons and
groups associated with the schools and the students including:
--Identification of the organization responsible for providing
emergency information to the schools;
--The method (e.g., siren, tone-alert radios, and telephone calls) for
contacting and activating designated dispatchers and school bus
drivers; and
--The method (e.g., Emergency Alert System (EAS) messages) for
notifying parents and guardians of the status and location of their
children.
Based on the above, the petitioners' requested revision to 10 CFR
Part 50 is not required.
F. Require annual site inspections of daycare centers and nursery
schools within the evacuation zone by emergency management officials.
NRC Review: Inspections of daycare centers and nursery schools are
the responsibility of the individual state and are outside NRC
statutory authority. The Commission sees no safety reason within the
scope of its statutory authority to require annual inspections of
daycare centers and nursery schools.
G. Require the participation of daycare centers and nursery schools
within the EPZ in radiological emergency preparedness exercises
designed to determine each institution's state of readiness.
NRC Review: FEMA's GM EV-2 (pp. 6 and 7) specifies that offsite
organizations, with assigned responsibilities for protecting daycare
centers and nursery schools, are to demonstrate their ability to
protect the
[[Page 75089]]
students in an exercise. This ensures that in a radiological emergency,
plans for protecting daycare centers and nursery schools will be
enacted successfully while preventing disruption to the children
attending these schools. Current NRC regulations in 10 CFR Part 50,
Appendix E, reflect this FEMA guidance. Section F.2 of Appendix E
permits exercises without public (including daycare centers and nursery
schools) participation. The Commission has determined that exercises
can be adequately evaluated without the participation of schools or
members of the public. This eliminates safety concerns for students, as
well as, the disruption of daycare center and nursery school activities
that might arise during exercise participation. In addition, as
mentioned in the response to request ``E,'' pursuant to FEMA guidance,
state and local government officials should be contacting daycare
centers and nursery schools regarding emergency plans for the
facilities. The petition has presented no evidence that would cause the
NRC to reconsider this determination.
H. Require creation of identification cards, school attendance
lists, and fingerprint records for all children who are to be
transported to a relocation center, to ensure no child is left behind
or is unable, due to age, to communicate his or her contact information
to emergency workers.
NRC Review: State and local governments have the responsibility for
ensuring that licensed daycare centers and nursery schools have
mechanisms in place for maintaining child accountability. FEMA, as the
authority on offsite emergency planning, has determined that it is
unnecessary to require that such detailed mechanisms be a component of
emergency plans. The Commission finds no safety reason to justify
requiring such detailed mechanisms in its regulations.
I. Require development by emergency management officials of
educational materials for parents, informing them what will happen to
their children in case of a radiological emergency, and where their
children can be picked up after an emergency evacuation.
NRC Review: Current NRC and FEMA requirements and guidance
adequately address this specific request. FEMA's GM EV-2 (p. 2)
specifies that the Emergency Alert System (EAS) notify parents of the
status and location of their children in the event of an emergency. The
Commission believes that parental notification via the EAS is adequate
to assure that parents will be informed of their childrens' location
following an emergency evacuation.
J. Require stocking of KI pills and appropriate educational
materials at all daycare centers and nursery schools within the 10-mile
EPZ.
NRC Review: The Commission's regulations, specifically 10 CFR
50.47b.(10), require individual states to consider using KI in the
event of an emergency. The regulations require that a range of
protective actions be developed for the plume exposure pathway EPZ for
emergency workers and the public. In developing this range of actions,
consideration was to be given to evacuation, sheltering, and, as a
supplement to these, the prophylactic use of KI, as appropriate. Under
this regulation, each individual state must decide whether the
stockpiling of KI is appropriate for the citizens within its
jurisdiction. Once a state decides to stockpile KI, it is incumbent on
that state to develop a program for distribution. This program is
reviewed by FEMA under the 44 CFR 350 process. The petition did not
provide information that would cause the NRC to reconsider this
determination.
K. Require radiological emergency preparedness training for all
daycare center and nursery school employees within the 10-mile EPZ.
NRC Review: The Commission believes that specialized training for
daycare center and nursery school employees is unnecessary because they
would be using already established and distributed procedures for
evacuation. Absent compelling information that specialized training for
daycare center and nursery school employees would result in significant
safety benefits that justify the additional regulatory burden, the
Commission finds no safety reason to justify the requested revision to
10 CFR Part 50.
L. Require listing of designated relocation centers in area phone
directories, so that parents can quickly and easily find where their
children will be sent in case of a radiological emergency.
NRC Review: FEMA's GM EV-2 (p. 4) specifies that state and local
government offsite emergency plans are to designate relocation centers
outside of the 10-mile EPZ for all schools, including daycare centers
and nursery schools. Some states list the relocation centers in
telephone directories, some states identify the relocation centers in
the yearly public information packages, and some states identify the
relocation centers in their offsite emergency plans.\1\ The Commission
believes that the current publication practices are adequate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See March 23, 2005 letter from Roy Zimmerman to Eric J.
Epstein and March 24, 2005 letter from Roy Zimmerman to Lawrence T.
Christian (available on NRC's ADAMS document system under the
accession numbers ML050590344 and ML050590357, respectively).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
M. Require establishment of toll-free or 911-type telephone lines,
to provide information about radiological emergency plans and
procedures for daycare centers and nursery schools within the 10-mile
EPZ.
NRC Review: Although not required by NRC regulations or provided in
FEMA guidance, all states provide a toll-free phone number in the
yearly public information package where members of the public can
acquire emergency preparedness information. The Commission sees no
added safety benefits in revising its regulations to require something
that all states are already doing.
N. Creation of written scripts for use by the local Emergency Alert
System that include information about evacuation plans and designated
relocation centers for daycare centers and nursery schools.
NRC Review: FEMA's GM EV-2 (p. 6) specifies that a method is to
exist (e.g., EAS) for notifying daycare center and nursery school
parents of the status and location of their children, in the event of
an emergency. FEMA has decided that it is unnecessary to incorporate
such a prescriptive requirement into its regulations and guidance, and
the petition provided no evidence that the current method of
notification is inadequate. As a result, the Commission sees no added
safety benefit in requiring a written script.
Commission Evaluation
The evaluation of the advantages and disadvantages of the
rulemaking requested by the petition with respect to the four strategic
goals of the Commission follows:
1. Ensure Protection of Public Health and Safety and the
Environment: The NRC staff believes that the requested rulemaking would
not make a significant contribution to maintaining safety because
current NRC and FEMA regulations and guidance already require inclusion
of nursery schools and daycare centers in state and local government
offsite emergency plans. This was verified by the state governments
that submitted comment letters which stated that daycare centers and
nursery schools are included in their offsite emergency planning and
that this is not an issue requiring a change to the emergency planning
regulations. As such, it is a potential
[[Page 75090]]
compliance issue that can be resolved using the current regulatory
structure.
2. Ensure the Secure Use and Management of Radioactive Materials:
The requested regulatory amendments would have no impact on the
security provisions necessary for the secure use and management of
radioactive materials. The petition for rulemaking deals with the
taking of protective actions for nursery schools and day care centers
by offsite authorities, which is currently required by NRC and FEMA
regulations and guidance.
3. Ensure Openness in Our Regulatory Process: The requested
rulemaking would not enhance openness or public confidence in our
regulatory process because the petitioners' requests raise potential
issues of compliance with the existing requirements and guidance. The
NRC staff does not believe that the contentions identify deficiencies
in regulatory requirements. Appendix 4 in NUREG-0654, discusses
``special facility populations.'' Daycare centers and nursery schools
fall under the definition of ``special facility populations'' and as
such, state and local governments are currently required to ensure that
these populations are included in the offsite emergency response plans.
It should be noted, however, that 3000 members of the public co-signed
the original petition for rulemaking. Additionally, 410 members of the
public signed letters supporting the petition. This amount of public
support reinforces the importance of NRC and FEMA's continued
commitment to providing protection for the public in the event of an
emergency which has always included daycare centers and nursery
schools.
4. Ensure that NRC Actions Are Effective, Efficient, Realistic and
Timely: The proposed revisions would decrease efficiency and
effectiveness because current NRC and FEMA regulations and guidance
already adequately address the petition requests.
Amending the regulations would require licensees and state and
local governments to generate additional and more prescriptive
information in their emergency plans, and the NRC and FEMA staffs would
need to evaluate the additional information. The additional NRC staff
and licensee effort would not improve efficiency or effectiveness. In
addition, the NRC resources expended to promulgate the rule and
supporting regulatory guidance would be significant with little return
value.
5. Ensure Excellence in Agency Management: The requested rule would
have no effect on the excellence in NRC management, but would increase
licensee and state and local government burden by requiring the
generation of additional, unnecessary, and burdensome information with
little expected benefit because current NRC and FEMA regulations and
guidance already adequately address the petition requests. This
rulemaking would add significant burden on a national scale in order to
address a potential local compliance issue.
Reason For Denial
The Commission is denying the petition for rulemaking (PRM-50-79)
submitted by Mr. Lawrence T. Christian, et al. Current NRC requirements
and NRC and FEMA guidance, provide reasonable assurance of adequate
protection of all members of the public, including children attending
daycare centers and nursery schools, in the event of a nuclear power
plant incident. Many of the specific requests of the petitioner are
either already covered by regulations and/or guidance documents or are
inappropriate for inclusion in NRC regulations due to their very
prescriptive nature. The Commission does believe, however, that
information obtained during the review of the petition does raise
questions about local implementation of relevant requirements and
guidelines. Accordingly, the NRC staff met with FEMA officials to
assure an understanding of this issue for consideration by FEMA as
reflected in separate letters to the petitioner and TMI-Alert Chairman,
Eric Epstein dated respectively, March 23, 2005 and March 24, 2005.\2\
Copies of those letters are available through the NRC's ADAMS document
system and can be located using accession numbers ML050590344 and
ML050590357, respectively. The NRC staff will continue to work with
FEMA to ensure emergency planning exercises are appropriately focused
and provide adequate assurance regarding compliance with NRC and FEMA
regulations and guidance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ FEMA did evaluate a May 3, 2005 Emergency Planning exercise
at TMI. NRC understands that during this exercise FEMA reviewed
aspects of emergency planning involving nurseries and daycare
centers. No deficiencies were identified by FEMA during the
exercise. FEMA's final report on the exercise was issued on August
4, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For these reasons, the Commission denies PRM-50-79.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day of December, 2005.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. E5-7518 Filed 12-16-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P