Skip to main content

Frequently Asked Questions/Emergency Preparedness Guidance Clarification

On this page:

Nuclear Industry Expectations

While any member of the public may submit an EPFAQ for NRC consideration, the staff expects the nuclear industry to work with the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) to coordinate, discuss, and submit EPFAQs through NEI. This will ensure consistency and allows other nuclear industry representatives to assist in the development of the applicable EPFAQ.

Question Criteria

A potential EPFAQ should be a question addressing issues where the regulatory guidance may not be sufficiently clear, or where consistency in application would benefit both the NRC and licensees. To be considered as an EPFAQ, the initiator shall apply the following criteria:

  • The question must be sufficiently generic (e.g., Does it affect more than one licensee or plant without consideration or evaluation of site-specific information?).
  • The question does not involve unresolved inspection issues, enforcement actions, allegations, or other situations covered by existing regulatory processes.
  • The question does not involve classified, safeguards, or official use only information.
  • The question does not request interpretation of NRC regulations, clarification of guidance not yet published as final, or NEI/Industry documents submitted but not endorsed by the NRC.
  • The question relates to guidance applicable to licensees.  Questions related to the development, implementation or evaluation of offsite emergency plans and preparedness are the responsibility of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), per the FEMA/NRC Memorandum of Understanding contained in Appendix A to 44 CFR 353, and will not be accepted under this EPFAQ process.
  • The question does not request clarification of on-going licensing activities or issues processed by the licensee in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(q) or Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50.
  • The question does not pertain to the EP Performance Indicators, Baseline EP Inspection Procedures, or Appendix Manual Chapter 0609 (EP Significance Determination Process).

If all of the above criteria are met, then an EPFAQ is appropriate.

Disclaimer: The information in any response to an email sent to this address is provided as a public service and solely for informational purposes and is not, nor should be deemed as, an official NRC position, opinion or guidance, or "a written interpretation by the General Counsel" under 10 CFR 50.3, on any matter to which the information may relate. The opinions, representations, positions, interpretations, guidance or recommendations which may be expressed by the NRC technical staff responding to an inquiry are solely the NRC technical staff's and do not necessarily represent the same for the NRC. Accordingly, the fact that the information was obtained through the NRC technical staff will not have a precedential effect in any legal or regulatory proceeding.

Final FAQ Resolution may be considered as part of the revision process for applicable EP guidance.

If you are reporting a safety or security concern, please see our Report a Safety or Security Concern page.

EPFAQs Under Review

These EPFAQs are under review and yet to be finalized.

EPFAQ

Title

ADAMS Accession Number

There are currently no EPFAQs Under Review

EPFAQs Out for Public Comment

The following report provides a list of EPFAQs out for public comment.

EPFAQ

Title

ADAMS Accession Number

EPFAQ 2024-01

Clarification on Handling Emergency Action Levels (EALs) Declared in Error Prior to Offsite Response Organization (ORO) Notification

ML26100A124

EPFAQs Completed

The following report provides a list of completed EPFAQs that have not been adopted into regulatory guidance.

EPFAQ

Title

ADAMS Accession Number

2015-009

Acceptability of Noble Gas Only Source Term for the Threshold Calculation of Effluent Monitor Readings for AS1 and AG1

ML16166A431

2015-010

Usage of NUREG/BR-0150 Volume 1, Rev. 4 "RTM-96 Response Figures A.5 - A.12 to Determine Core Damage

ML16166A419

2015-011

Usage of NEI 10-05 to support augmentation time changes EPFAQ was REJECTED as guidance is provided by NSIR/DPR ISG-001 and NUREG-0654/FEMA REP-1

N/A

2015-012

Usage of plant parameter information not available in the Control Room as an information and data source in an EAL

ML16166A404

2015-013

Hostile Action resulting in a loss of control of the facility declarations when fuel damage is likely within 4-hours or results in a loss of physical control of spent fuel

ML16166A366

2015-014

Consideration to allow for specifying relevant operating modes identified for the inability to control a key safety function cannot be maintained following a transfer of plant control to an alternate location

ML16166A240

2015-015

Consideration of listing site-specific power sources applicable for consideration for loss of power EALs

ML16166A191

2016-001

Definition of Hostile Action and/or Projectile EPFAQ was withdrawn by the industry via letter

ML17083A795

2016-002

Clarification of Equipment Damage as a Result of a Hazardous Event

ML17195A299

2017-001

Clarification of Implementation of the revised EPA Protective Action Guide regarding revisions to EAL

ML17199F736

2018-001

Reactor Coolant System Fission Product Barrier Loss Clarification

ML18338A290

2018-002

Clarification of Boiling Water Reactor Classification of a Reator Coolant System Leak Leak that may be Isolated Locally

ML18338A308

2018-003

Clarification of Site-Specific List of Plant Rooms or Areas that should be regarding Single Containment Fire Alarms

ML18338A397

2018-004

Hazardous Events Effects On Safety Systems Clarification

ML18340A051

2019-001

Clarification of Initiating Conditions CU1 (15 minutes) and CA1 (significance)

ML19275E817

2019-002

A question regarding the inclusion of a revision of 10CFR21 in purchase orders was REJECTED as purchase orders are outside the scope of EPFAQs.

N/A

2019-003

A question regarding a clarification of EPFAQ 2013-004 was REJECTED because NUREG-0654, Revision 1, Supplement 3 (ADAMS Accession No. ML113010596).  Further clarification is provided in the NRC response to EPFAQ 2019-003.

ML19354A835

2019-004

Clarification Based On Implementation Of The Impact Of BWROG EPG/SAG Revision 4 On Various Emergency Action Levels.

ML20238C050

2020-001

Relief from Annual Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) Update When Performing A Census Baseline ETE Study.

ML20206L127

2020-002

Clarification of emergency preparedness communication equipment relative to extended loss of all power communication equipment.

ML20206K985

2021-001

Clarification of Section 4.3 of NUREG-7002, "Criteria for Development of Evacuation Time Estimate Studies," regarding acceptable error and/or confidence interval

ML22203A071

2021-002

Clarification of NUREG-7002, "Criteria for Development of Evacuation Time Estimate Studies," regarding availability date for 2021 Census data

ML22203A088

Submit Your Question

Would you like to remain anonymous?:
Before sending us contact information, you may wish to review our Privacy Policy.
Country
Note: Submitting this information is voluntary. Your submission consents to its use as set forth in NRC's Privacy Policy.

A question may also be submitted by mail to:

Deputy Director Division of Preparedness and Response
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission TWN 3-B25
11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville MD 20852

How to submit attachments:

If you have attachments to provide, please send a separate email with attachments to: EPFAQ.Resource@nrc.gov

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, April 21, 2026

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, April 21, 2026