ML20053D276

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Renews Request for FEMA Testimony on Emergency Planning at OL Hearings.Testimony on Contention 3(b),(c) & (D) Re Offsite Plans,Interface Between Offsite & Onsite Plans & Provisions for Nonevacuation Emergency Measures Needed
ML20053D276
Person / Time
Site: Byron  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 06/02/1982
From: Christenbury E
NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD)
To: Perry S
Federal Emergency Management Agency
References
NUDOCS 8206040255
Download: ML20053D276 (1)


Text

DISTRIBUTION:

ESC Chron GCunningham/JMurray JScinto SGoldberg June 2, 1982 MYoung RRawson OELD FF (2)

Spence Perry, Esq.

SChesnut Assistant General Counsel KKiper Federal Emergency Management Agency 500 C Street, SW Washington, DC 20472 In the Matter of COMMONWEALTH EDIS0N COMPAtlY (Byron Station, Units 1 and 2)

Docket Nos. 50-454, 50-455

Dear Mr. Perry:

liarshall Sanders has requested that I renew, in writing, my request for FEMA testimony on emergency planning at the Byron operating license hearing.

As I indicated in my February 11, 1982 letter (copy attached), FEMA testimony is necessary on intervenor DAARE/ SAFE Contention 3.

Specifically, FEMA testimony is needed on subparts (b), (c) and (d) of Contention 3 regarding the existence of offsite plans, the interface between offsite and onsite plans, and provisions for non-evacuation emergency measures.

The hearing will begin on August 18, 1982. Prefiled written testimony is due July 28, 1982. Aspects of DAARE/ SAFE Contention 3 will be the subject of a Staff summary disposition to be filed by June 7,1982. The Applicant is also expected to file a motion for summary disposition of Contention 3, in whole or in part.

A ruling on these motions is not expected until the end of July,1982. Their pendency does not relieve the Staff from filing testimony on the portions of Contention 3 requiring a FEMA witness. To meet the hearing schedule, draft FEMA testinony should be supplied to the NRC case attorney, Steven Goldberg (telephone 492-8674) by mid-June. He is available to discuss the details of the pro:pective testimony, to the extent necessary.

With further regard to the Byron proceeding, the appeal by a former intervenor, League of Women Voters, from its dismissal from the case is still pending. An Appeal Board decision is expected shortly. As I indicated in my February 11 letter, we will promptly inform you of a decision,in that regard and the status of the League's original emergency planningpontentions.

Thank yo[,for your prompt attention to this matter.

Sincerely, 8206040255 820602 PDR ADOCK 05000454 Edward S. Christenbury G

PDR Chief Hearing Counsil Attachment as stated 1

b0Yf2' 0FC :0 ELD cj: 5:sgigber9

0 ELD

.t

/

i,.____:____j..____:_

nne.

D

/., 2 h_ _ _ _ _ ;: % h r i s t eg b u ry_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

g___iM91@9E9193[

_ Eay dATE :

'd s' - M :

P