1 NRC REGION I, FEMA I,II, III Joint Emergency Preparedness Information Conference January 22, 2010 William Eberst Technological Hazards Division /REP Federal Emergency Management Agency

2 Major Activities  REP Program Manual and Supplement 4  HSEEP Integration  Update to REP Training Curriculum  New Reactor Combined License Application  Support of Hostile Action Based (HAB) Drills

3 Agenda  Reasonable Assurance  REP Program Manual-presented earlier by Rick Kinard  HSEEP  Training  New Reactor – update

4 Reasonable Assurance January, 2010

5 Reasonable Assurance  In the communities surrounding commercial nuclear power plants, 44 CFR 350.5(b) directs FEMA’s Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program (REPP) to review State and local radiological emergency plans and preparedness. Approved plans and preparedness “must be determined to adequately protect the public health and safety by providing reasonable assurance that appropriate protective measures can be taken offsite in the event of a radiological emergency.”

6 RA Proposed Definition (draft) Further discussions with NRC required; comments from staff and RAC chairs being solicited  FEMA defines reasonable assurance as a determination that State, local, tribal, and utility offsite preparedness plans and procedures are adequate to protect public health and safety in the vicinity of operating or proposed commercial nuclear power plants. FEMA shall take into consideration plans, procedures, personnel, training, facilities, and equipment deemed essential to protecting public health and safety during any incident at a commercial nuclear power plant. FEMA shall make its adequacy determination, supported by other Federal agencies as necessary, by conducting inspections, providing staff assistance visits, organizing and conducting training, participating in, observing and evaluating drills and exercises, and by being an engaged partner with Federal, State, local, and tribal government officials and industry stakeholders. Where improvements or corrections are needed, FEMA will work closely with Federal, State, local, and tribal government officials and industry stakeholders to resolve the issue(s). In making its reasonable assurance determination, FEMA shall be guided by the standards, criteria, and policy found in applicable laws, regulations, and contemporary emergency preparedness doctrine.

7 What is Reasonable Assurance  State, local and tribal governments emergency plans/procedures  Are adequate to protect the public health and safety within the vicinity of a fixed nuclear facility  Continue to be capable of implementation

8 Determining Reasonable Assurance  Validating Reasonable Assurance through the review and assessment of offsite plans and preparedness  State and/or tribal governments providing an initial and ongoing opinion that State, local, and tribal plans are adequate to protect the public health & safety  Annual Letters of Certification  Staff assistance visits  Training, drills, exercises  Disaster Initiated Reviews  Actual all hazards events  Any other applicable periodic reviews

9 Reasonable Assurance Metrics  FEMA is developing a weighted metrics system  Provide key categories of review  Emergency Response Support and Mobilization  Notification Methods and Procedures  Incident Assessment  Provide weighted metrics to measure the categories  Glean information from regulations that pertain to the categories that FEMA will look for to provide a Reasonable Assurance determination  Areas where categories can be demonstrated  Actual Event  Radiological Exercise; Non-REP  All Hazards  REP Exercise

10 Conclusion  Reasonable Assurance provides an expectation that the health and safety of the public in the vicinity of fixed nuclear facility will be protected  Determined by FEMA and results supplied to NRC for their use.  Use existing regulations and guidance  Developing new metrics

11 Integration of the Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP) and Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program (REPP) January 2010

12 National Preparedness Vision  National Preparedness Guidelines; September 2007: “A Nation Prepared with coordinated capabilities to prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from all hazards in a way that balances risk with resources and need.”  Preparedness Cycle

13 National Exercise Program (NEP): Creating a Unified Exercise Strategy  Meets requirements laid out in Homeland Security Presidential Directive 8, Homeland Security Act of 2002 and Public Law , “Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006” (PKEMRA)  Provides a national program and a multi-year planning system to focus, coordinate, plan, conduct, execute, evaluate, and prioritize national security and homeland security preparedness-related exercises activities  Works as the primary mechanism to improve delivery of Federal preparedness assistance to State and local governments, strengthening preparedness capabilities of all entities.

14 Homeland Security Exercise & Evaluation Program (HSEEP)  The NEP provides policy guidance making HSEEP a key pillar of the homeland security preparedness exercises program  HSEEP established a national standard providing  Common doctrine and ‘tools’ for exercise scheduling, planning/design, conduct, evaluation, assessment, and corrective actions  Consistent terminology used by all exercise planners  A platform for sharing information (LLIS)  ‘Compliance’ mechanism for State/local/tribal use of grant funds for exercises

15 Homeland Security Exercise & Evaluation Program (HSEEP)  HSEEP incorporates lessons learned and best practices from existing exercise programs (including CSEEP and REPP) and can adapt to the full spectrum of all hazards exercises  HSEEP integrates language and concepts from;  National Strategy for Homeland Security  National Preparedness Guidelines  National Response Framework (NRF)  National Incident Management System (NIMS)  Universal Task List (UTL)  Target Capabilities List (TCL)

16 Homeland Security Exercise & Evaluation Program (HSEEP)  Guiding principles of HSEEP:  Conduct an annual Training and Exercise Plan Workshop and develop and maintain a Multi-year Training and Exercise Plan.  Plan and conduct exercises in accordance with the guidelines set forth in HSEEP Volumes I-III and the “HSEEP Prevention Exercises” volume as applicable.  Develop and submit a properly formatted After-Action Report/Improvement Plan (AAR/IP).  Track and implement corrective actions identified in the AAR/IP.

17 REP - HSEEP Integration  What it does:  Compliance with elements of HSPD-5, HSPD-8 and PKEMRA  Furthers nationwide standardization for exercise design, conduct, evaluation, and improvement planning  Integrates scheduling of REP exercises with other Federal, State, and local exercises under the National Exercise Program 5-year Plans and Schedules  Provides an opportunity to reduce Federal, State, and local exercise fatigue by combining multiple requirements into fewer total exercises  Provides a suite of standardized tools for scheduling, planning, information sharing, evaluation/corrective action  Requires active ownership by REPP, State/local/Tribal, and industry partners in order to be successful

18 REP - HSEEP Integration cont…  What it does not:  HSEEP does not establish additional exercise requirements for REPP  HSEEP does not require additional activities that will add to the cost of a REPP exercise  Require REPP to abandon existing evaluation criteria or to adopt TCL methodologies  Require new capabilities or restrict development and implementation of NUREG/REP 1 requirements.

19 Document Review  Review, update, and align all REP exercise related directives with HSEEP  44 CFR Part 350  NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Supp 4  Incorporate HSEEP into REP Program Manual  Review, update, and align all HSEEP exercise related directives to ensure inclusion for REP requirements  HSEEP Volumes I-IV  REP participation in NED HSEEP Training & Exercise Workshops

20 Training Course Review  Review and Align all REP & HSEEP training courses  Creating E/L/G-131 Exercise Evaluation & Improvement Planning currently in pilot stage: 1 in Oct 2009, next Feb 2010, Apr 2010  HSEEP Course Management moving from NED to EMI  Updated REP Program and Planning Course

21 Scheduling Synchronization  NRC/FEMA Regional Coordination  Establish regional REP priorities  NRC/FEMA Regional REP scheduling meetings  Align exercise scheduling efforts  Coordinate regional REP priorities with NEP  NEP FEMA Regional Training and Exercise Planning Workshops (TEPW)

22 Pilot Exercises  Pilot Integration exercises that follow the HSEEP doctrine, adhere to REP criteria and validate REP/HSEEP integration  Palo Verde – March 2009  San Onofre – September 2009  Browns Ferry – November 2009  HSEEP available for use during any REP exercise  HSEEP Formatted Documents  HSEEP Exercise Evaluation Guides: drafts completed and in use for San Onofre and Browns Ferry  HSEEP Tools

23 Path Forward  January 26, 2010 Lessons Learned/Path Forward meeting at HQ for all FEMA Regions  Present Lessons Learned, Discuss path forward  Get Region “buy in” on best ways to move forward on the Integration

24 REP Training January 2010

25 Instructor Methodology (IM) Course  The new REP IM course is the first step in gaining stronger control of our REP training program while decreasing our dependence on contractor support (in regards to training).  The REP IM Course has been developed internally to enhance and improve the quality of instructional delivery within the REP Program. The course is an intense 5 day training that builds a potential or current instructor’s knowledge, skills and confidence. The course will provide the REPP subject matter expert with the skills and ability to plan courses, identify the “target audience” and deliver quality instruction in a clear, useable format.

26 Instructor Methodology (IM) Course  The first course offering was hosted in Atlanta by Region IV May 11 – 15, It produced 13 qualified instructors, 12 of which are Regional REP staff.  The second course offering was held at the Emergency Management Institute (EMI) June 15 – 19, After the June course our REP instructor CADRE now includes over 30 REP staff members.  Next Course: Week of February 8th in Denton, TX 

27 REP Planning Course Revision  Complete!!!! Final Pilot presented Jan 2010  Uses the ARPAT (All-Hazards Response and Preparedness Assessment Tool) for use as a training tool.  Will be completely Instructed by FEMA Staff  Goal: Two courses per FEMA Region-FY10

28 REP Exercise Evaluator course  E/L/G-131 Exercise Evaluation and Improvement Planning:  All Hazard Evaluator Training Course  Prerequisites: IS-120a, HSEEP  G-131: Two day, State offered course  E/L-131: Four day, resident course  Constructed by NED, EMI, REP, CSEPP

29 New Reactor Combined License Applications January 2010

30 Offsite Emergency Plan Reviews  The NRC has requested that FEMA REP provide findings and determinations as to whether offsite emergency plans are adequate and can be implemented.  Authority – 44 CFR 353 Appendix A to Part 353— Memorandum of Understanding Between Federal Emergency Management Agency and Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

31 Statistics  Received 18 requests from the NRC to review offsite emergency procedures  Completed nine reviews  One has been stopped at the request of the utility  Will complete three this calendar quarter  Will complete the rest by end of third quarter of 2010

32 Contacts Technical Inquiries  Craig Fiore (703) Training  Lou DeGilio (202) New Reactor  Al Coons (202) HSEEP  William Eberst (202)

33