Text

Reply to Objections to Filed Contentions.Association Was Ignorant of Rules When First Papers Filed.Specific Contentions & Certificate of Svc Encl
	ML20040A418
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	01/11/1982
From:	Fleisher Z; WEST BRANCH CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION
To:	; Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Shared Package
ML20040A417	List: ML20040A416; ML20040A418;
References
	EP, RS, *SD, ISSUANCES-SP, NUDOCS 8201210048
	Download: ML20040A418 (16)
	v • d • e

.

h h

q

\ .

p %

y cc --

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA d p

i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 'JAN 171982 > 'l Offi:e cf the Se:rc:q /

ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Dccketir.2 & SOMce / :

$ Br:n:h !

Before Administrative Judges: g Louis J. Carter, Chairman D s Dr. Oscar H. Paris i Frederick J. Shon f

____________________________________) j In the matter of )

) Docket Nos.

Consolidated Edison Co. of New York ) 50-247 SP Indian Point Unit #2 ) 50-286 SP

)

Power Authority of the State of N.Y.)

Indian Point Unit #3 )

)

____________________________________) January 11,1982 WEST BRANCH CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION'S REPLY TO OBJECTIONS TO ITS FILED CONTENTIONS West Branch Conservation Association hereby begs the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board for permission to enlarge upon its previous documents filed as far as its contentions are concerned. We ask for such extension under section 2.711 of CFR 10 Part 2. West Branch Con-servation Association (hereinafter WBCA) has not asked for above permission sooner because it thought it was in compliance since it had, in timely fashion, filed replies to challenges to its request to intervene on December 2.

November 24, 1981, NRC Staff wrote in " Response of the NRC Staff to petitions for leave to intervene..." at 14 Filing this document for WBCA Zipporah S. Fleisher, Secretary 443 Buena Vista Road New City, N.Y. 10956 914/634-2327

~*~

820 1210098

TABLE OF CONTENTS l

page #

Request by West Branch Conservation Association to enlarge its previously filed , contentions 1 Contention in reply to question #1 4 Contention in reply to question #2 8 Contention in reply to question #3 10 Contention in reply to question #4 11 Contention in reply to question #5 11 Contention in reply to question #6 11 Contention in reply to question #7 12 Summary 12

( i )

1 i

"In sum, at least one of the issues set forth by WBCA in its petition meets the " aspect" requirements of 10 CFR 2.714 ( a) ( 2 ) . " UBCA was too brief in its descriptions of its contentions due to a lack of understanding of what was expected. We are used to filing briefs at a later stage in proceedings, which we have attended before the N.Y. State Public Service Commission, the State Siting Board and the Dept. of Environmental Conservation. We have been parties to many rate cases and generic cases, lasting the whole way.

Therefore we were surprised to read in"NRC Staff .

Response to Contentions of 10 CFR 2.714 Petitoners" of December 31, received January 6, that WBCA has failed to provide sufficient contentions, page 41. We did not use the formal form because we were ignorant of the rules.

We thought our requests and letters served as contentions as listed November 2 and December 2, 1981. This is the first Federal case in which we have asked to intervene.

4 There is no copy of the Federal Register on file anywhere

in Rockland County of which we are aware. The County Attorney subscribes but disburses it to the agencies when he sees something of interest. He does not keep a file.

As we asked at the December 2 conference and by letter to the Chairman of December 7, there is no docu-1 nent room available to us. He have written for docu-i

[ ,

I l

. _-- . , _ . . _ _.-- - -_ _ _ _ . . . . _ _ , - ~. . . . . - , ._. ._ _ . _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _

ments and only after the December 2 hearing did we re-ceive CFR 50 and 10.

Ue had an out of date copy of UUREG-0654 and now have it with Rev. 1. We have received a copy of UUREG/CR-0400.

Despite the fact that the URC order of January 8, 1981, states on page 3 "The Task Force Report itself will be distributed free upon written request to the 3RC" we re-ceived a form asking us to send $4.50.

He, therefore, hereby plead to resubmit our conten-tions, with the knowledge that we are not privy to many studies listed in NRC Staff's response and which we have f now tried to conform to the CFR.

Ue will also try to respond to objections from J Coned and PASNY.

We have studied the several versions of the Emergency Plan for two years. Ue live within the 10 mile EPZ. We cannot imagine anything more germane than the interest of our members in their lives, safety and homes.

In the past we have made movies of traffic problems.

One of our members inspected the interior of the IP 52 containment building and the sump pumps after the October, l

1980, flooding and testified in U.Y. State PSC Case #27869.

There is hardly any group more affected than ours yet it appears that far less is required to become an intervenor so long as the correct papers have been filed. Our mem-ber's report of his inspection was sent to Mr. Harold

! 2. Denton who replied May 15, 1981, recognizing many of

l our suggested modifications and improvements and agreeing with them..." Introducing brackish water into containment is not the optimum design..." etc. Also agreeing that the "means available for detecting and removing water in containment were inadequate."

He intend to provide witnesses to back up our con-tentions listed below. We are endeavoring to comply.

We are prepared to address Question #5 from our ex-perience before the N.Y. State PSC. We would like to re-ceive the studies to which Staff refers under its con-tentions. Probably no other intervenors in these dock-ets has f ollowed the finances of the liew York Power Pool companiec as much as us. Even now we are in the case

27679 - Long Range Financing Plans. We were the only party other than the staffs and Pool companies in the generic case #27137 on the Fuel Adjustment Clause that stayed through the case.

COIITEliTIOI!S I:7 REPLY TO THE SEVE 7 QUESTIOliS QUESTIOP :7 UMBER 1 If a serious accident occurred, breaching the con-tainment vessel, damage within the ten mile range has been evaluated. The risk that this poses is beyond mecoure because the area in Rockland County cannot be evacuated and the terrain surrounding the stations IP #2 and IF 33, in Rockland County is unique.

The basis f or being unable to evacuate is that the roads are antiquated, designed by the early settlers with very little more improvements beyond paving.

Rockland County is unique in that it is surrounded by mountain ridges and the Hudson River. There are three ridges which run north-south and the three valleys that follow after each ridge. East-west exodus is impossible.

The Plan accepts that fact and offers the routes mostly in the north-south directions.

If one were to assume that both the north and south lanes of each of our best roads, which are only two lanes wide, were to be redirected so that both lanes were opera-ting only in a southward direction, we would still not be able to handle the traffic shown on the maps as exit routes.

If any extra contingencies existed, the plan would be even less useful. On summer weekends and during ski weather Rockland county attracts a large population of transients. On any Sunday evening the traffic can come to a halt on the New York State Thruway and Palisades Inter- ;

state Parkway causing blocking of entrances and exits which then back out onto other roads causing obstructions on local roads. An inch of snow can create the same clogged conditions. An accident on a road as wide as the Thruway can have the same " domino" effect and our local police can so attest.

I 1

. l

. t i

Route 9W more often than not is perched along the '

Palisades providing nothing but a solid rock mountain for a shoulder (?) and on the other,a cliff falling down to the Hudson River.

In the" Bus Routes and Pick Up Points" Stony Point is shown for going south along route 9W to Wayne Avenue, to route 210 and thence to the Palisades Parkway. Uayne Avenue is narrow and winding and undulating and not capable of carrying emergency traffic over its very sharp turns.

Route ERPA #30, route 9W south to US 202 south to 9W again. We have measured the road where US 202 leaves 99 at West Haverstraw. Two lanes together are 18 feet wide. The shoulders are 3 feet wide and full of pot holes. After ascending the hill and turning westward toward Garnerville, U.S. 202 is 19 feet wide from curb to curb with no shoulders.

Route ERPA #31 has the same objections as #30.. In both cases route 202 winds, is narrow and blind.

ERPA #32, Clarkstown, route 9W south to route 303 to Kings Highway to Casper Hill Road to route 303. The USGS map of the Hyack Quadrangle shows Casper Hill Road dropping from 350 feet to 200 feet in 400 feet, or a 40% slope. Assuming that the map is not exactly detailed for the short length of road those who know it would not choose it under any circumstances. The road ascends and descends a small hill at very steep grades and exits onto 303 at an angle of probably 50 degrees such that one cannot see the oncoming traffic in the same direction.

f

-s- l y._ .

9 ERPA #33 is shown as a Primary Route and it, too traverses Casper Hill Road. It appears that the route was chosen from a mapj because there are alternatives.

Further, Middletown Road has a famous bottleneck where the New York State Thruway crosses overhead and the underpass is but two narrow lanes wide.

He have no central control of traffic lights such as is suggested. Nor could they be wired for central control in any cost effective mode.

Route 210, which leads to route 17 as well as to the Palisades Parkway, is only widened part of the way.

l The only roads nor th-south that are not two lane

" cow paths" are route 303 south of the Thruway and the Palisades Interstate Parkway. The grades and widths of these narrow roads are a headache without any unusual excitement or pressures. Commuting time finds cars lined up at the exits of the Parkway in such fashion as they block the right hand lane back into the . Parkway.

It is all well and good to say that traffic controllers would be stationed to expedite the intersections but ue cannot believe they will either be numerous enough or effective. A flat tire, or o'therwise disabled car cannot be pushed off some of our roads built into the mountains such as 9U at overy place along the uay.

- 7_

QUESTION NUMBER 2 The use of brackish Hudson River cooling water is unique to Indian Point units #2 and #3 and should be discontinued.

The basis for the above statement is that water in the cooling system has caused serious corrosion problems not only in the containment building cooling system but it has leaked into the steam system and the brackish water is now on the steam side.

The proposed Director's Order will not result in a sig-nificant reduction in risk primarily because Coned has not shown us anything but unexpected human errors that are larger than some of the probable physical breakdowns.

The basis for that statement lies in the history of fines I

by the NRC and New York State Public Service Commission.

The most recent published accident has resulted in Coned's receiving the blame for the flooding of the containment building at IP #2. By the nature of the defects in that event, problems with sump pumps, lack of instrumentation to indicate flooding, etc. surrounding the October, 1980, flooding of the containment building, it is obvious that inherent defects are continuously discovered by malfunc-tions, faulty construction, incorrectly wired pumps, etc.

Quality control has not been good. The pump system was not even considered a safety related system.

The Director's Order cannot reverse embrittlement of the vesse1 which poses a monmumental danger should another flooding occur.

The basis for that statement is the embrittlement of the vessels of both IP stations has proven to be beyond design specs. The parts cannot last for the design life of the plant.

The Director's Order cannot solve the reduction in

]

design life expectation of the steam generator tubes.

The basis for that assertion is that the steam generators require exceptions to exceed the number of tubes permitted to be plugged and there will soon be a time when they will have to be replaced.

While some improvements have been ordered in the welded joints they will continue to corrode. The basis for that statement is the piping system itself,'

cement lined pipes are bound to corrode again at the welded joints because of the unique use of brackish water.

NUREG-CR-0400, page 48, section 12, describes the many design defects that have occurred that offer examples of possible core meltdowns. The basis for the above, and many more contentions in the same vein that we will offer, is a visit inside the containment building by a member of WBCA on March 13, 1981 which confirmed the contention that quality control at IP #2 cannot be trusted to produce a safe operation.

1

_9_

j l

l

QUESTION NUMBER 3 FEMA evacuation uses the times of one half to several hours for an evacuation, NUREG-0654, Rev. 1, page 17.

The Emergency Plan for Rockland County suggests the time would be five to seven hours , ( and none for some hospital-imed persons.)

Rockland County cannot be evacuated in any safe time.

The basis for that contention is that site specific in-formation from Rockland County is lacking. We need such information from FEMA on which to base judgment. There will not be sufficient personnel to attend to the many rechirements. The plan shows a dependence on unsure sources.

There is no contingency shown in the plan for how power would be supplied in the event of an accident. Operating personnel might not choose to remain at Lovett and Bowline stations. There could be a failure in the transmission lines, blown up transformers, faulty cicuit breakers or a failure of the siren system. No mention is made in the plan of a possible take-over by the Power Pool and if it would be dependable. (Two sirens have already been impro- l perly placed on private property in Rockland County in error.)

^

Before each of the two major electricity blackouts we were told it couldn't happen. Orange and Rockland Utilities cannot be sure that key personnel will not abandon their posts.

SUMMARY

The contentions above outline our pressing concerns.

Our lives, health and property are ccntinuously endan-gered. We contend that the risks we face are excessive and we gain no benefits. We live with sirens, shelters and war type plans if we are forced to accept the plan.

Respectfully submitted, for West Branch Conservation Assn.

u

.f' pporah S. Fleisher, Secretary January 11, 1982 443 Buena Vista Road 914/G34-2327 U.Y. 1095 liewgpnCity, i g ib ,6 e

C 0'_. i:E

-- T F T

/

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA '

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD '82 JM 17 P7:18 M

Before Administrative Judges: hhh;;"i b.'

BRM'Cd Louis J. Carter, Chairman Frederick J. Shon Dr. Oscar H. Paris

________________________________)

In the Matter of )

CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY ) Docket Nos. 50-247 SP OF NEW YORK, INC. 50-286 SP (Indian Point, Unit No. 2) )

January 11, 1982 POWER AUTHORITY OF THE )

STATE OF NEW YORK (Indian Point, Unit No. 3) )

________________________________)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that I have served copies of:

Response to Power Authority's motion to exclude fear and Reply to Objections To Its Filed Contentions, of the West Branch Conservation Association on the following by depositing same in the U. S. Post Office at New City, New York, 10956 by first class mail on January 11, 1982.

Zipporah S. Fleisher Secretary 443 Buena Vista Road New City, N.Y. 10956 914/634-2327 fl' St EhlJ0f p a % fw \

l l

l 1

9.

1 s

l Louis J. Carter, Chairman Mr. Frederick J. Shon Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Uuclear Regulatory Commission United States Nuclear Uashington, D.C. 20555 . Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. Oscar H. Paris Counsel for NRC Staff Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Office of the Executive United States Nuclear Legal Director Regulatory Commission United States Nuclear Washington, D.C. 20555 Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Brent L. Brandenburg, Esq. Charles J. Maikish, Esq.

Consolidated Edison Company General Counsel of New York, Inc. The Port Authority of New York i 4 Irving Place and New Jersey New York, New York 10003 One World Trade Center, 66S l

New York, New York 10048 l

Power Authority State of N.Y.

c/o Morgan Associates 1899 L Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036 Charles A. Scheiner Jeffrey M. Blum, Esq. Westchester People's Action New York University Law School Coalition, Inc.

4 23 Vanderbilt Hall P.O. Box 488 40 Washington Square South White Plains, New York 10602 New York, New York 10012 Ellyn R. We is s , Esq. Mayor George V. Begany Harmon and Weiss Village of Buchanan 1725 I Street, N.W., Suite 506 236 Tate Avenue Washington, D.C. 20006 Buchanan, New York 10511 Ms. Joan Holt Alan Latman, Esq.

New York Public Interest Research 44 Sunset Drive Group Croton-On-Hudson, New York 10520 5 Beekman Street New York, New York 10038 l

l

.. i i l 1

Ezra I. Bialik, Esq. And rew S . Roffe, Esq.

Steve Leipzig , Esq. New York State Assembly Environmental Protection Bureau Albany, New York 12248 New York State Attorney General's Office Two Uorld Trade Center New York, New York 10047 Eric O. Thorsen Esq.

Ms. Pa t Posner, Spoke spe rson Marc L. Pa rris , ,Esq.

Parents Concerned About Indian County Attorney Point County of Rockland P.O. Box 125 11 New Hempstead Road Croton-on-Hudson, New York 10520 New City, New York 10956 Renee Schwartz, Esq.

Bo te in , Hays, Sklar and Herzberg 200 Park Avenue New York, New York 10166 Greater New York Council Honorable Ruth W. Messinger on Energy Council Member c/o Dean R. Corren 4th District, Manhattan New York University City Hall 26 Stuyvesant Street New York, New York 10007

~

New York, New York 10003 Mr. Geof frey Cobb Ryan Mrs. Lorna Salzman Conservation Committee Chairman Friends of the Earth Director, New York City 208 West 13th Street Audubon Seciety New York, New York 10011 71 West 23rd Street, Suite 1828 New York, New York 10010 Stanley B. Klimberg, Esq. Mr. Al f red B . Del Bello General Counsel Westchester County Executive New York State Energy Office Westchester County 2 Rockefeller State Plaza 148 Martine Avenue Albany, New York 12223 New York, New York 10601 Ms. Judith Kessler, Coordinator Honorable Richard L. Brodsky Rockland Citizens for Safe Energy 9th Legislative District 300 New Hempstead Road Westchester County New Ci ty , New Yo rk 10956 County Of fice Building White Plains, New York 10601 Secretary United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Wa shing to n , D.C. 20555 -

ATTN: Chief, Docketing and Service Section

_

ML20040A418

Text

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

Search